PIPER CHEROKEE 140

[SAM]

I AM CONSIDERING PURCHASING A 140(73)BUT I AM HAVING A HARD TIME FINDING ANY REAL WORLD INFORMATION ABOUT THE PLANE,IF ANYONE HAS INFO OR SPECIALLY IF YOU ARE AN OWNER,I WOULD LOVE TO CHAT ABOUT IT.I HAVE BEEN FLYING A 172 BUT I CANT AFFORD ONE, I DONT WANT A CESSNA 150 BECAUSE I WOULD LIKE A 4 PLACE, AND THE CHEROKEE FITS THE BILL,I LIKE THE WAY IT LOOKS,THEY ARE REASONABLE IN PRICE
AND MORE POWERFUL THAN A 150.I THINK IT WOULD BE A NICE FIRST PLANE,AND I COULD MOVE UP TO A MORE POWERFUL AIRCRAFT LATER AS I GET MORE EXPERIENCE AND MONEY.

[JTaylor]

I've flown a friend's Cherokee 140 a number of times and I have to say, they are a lot of plane for the money. I have a lot more hours in small Cessnas however and here are some issues to consider.

The older ones often do not have toe brakes which is a bit of a nuisance, but actually what I like less is the overhead trim adjustment some have. I'll bet though, that if you flew one all the time, you wouldn't notice these issues.

Another item to watch on older 140s is the lack of a shoulder belt. Having one is pretty important for safety. A possible work-around is a shoulder harness which is actually tied into the rear seat belt. Sort of a kluge, though.

The 140 I've flown is sort of slow (105 kts), but I think it's out of rig.

I'm not going to get into high vs low wing, but it does seem to me that the Cherokee has a pretty respectable sink rate at lower airspeeds, which is somewhat of a risk for lower-time pilots.

From what my friend says, maintenance isn't much different than with a C-172. Many people like the mechanical flaps on Pipers better than the electric ones on all but the early Cessnas. All-in-all, the 140 is a pretty nice plane for the $18-$30K (US) price range.

[jhwelsch]

I've owned a Cherokee 140 for two years and love it. I did most of my training in Cessnas, starting with a 172 and than moving to a 152. I switched to a Warrior shortly before my checkride and bought the 140 two weeks after the checkride. I chose the 140 for the same reasons you've mentioned; I think your reasoning is sound.

I will remind you that, while it has 4 seats, you're not taking 3 friends with you unless they're kids or you've figured a way to do it without gas. There are times I wish I could carry 4 adults and that's the only thing that makes me think of moving up a notch.

The comment about sink rate is right on; after the 172, you'll think you're flying a rock when the fan stops. A bit disconcerting at first but you don't float a lot on landing!

Let me know if you want more info but I recommend the Cherokee. Good luck.

[matt]

WRONG. I got a 140. I take four adults all the time. It's called MATH. Useful load = 630 (discounting fuel). At 36 gallons, thats four adults wouldn't you say? I find little difference in handling.... mostly just feet room. As for the overhead trim... what are you... A BABy??? Cranking that baby is no problemo.

[Joel Kamphuis]

If you can swing a few extra bucks, try a cherokee 180...I carry 4 adults w/ some baggage & full tanks with no problem...I was trianed in it and now have about 210 hrs in her. Great plane(it's a 1963 w/ 2400TTAF)!

[Jimbo]

I think a P-140 is underpowered and much less
capable than a C-172 or P-161. You better put some skinny people in that P-140 to get 4 seats filled or forget gas and bags. I taught for 4 years in those things. Spend a little more $$ and find a nice IFR P-161 or C-172 you'll be glad you did. Jimbo

[wxwatcher]

I learned to fly in a 1973 Cherokee 140. Nice easy plane to fly. Power quadrant rather than the push rod throttle and mixture in most other small planes made it a breeze to set both power and mixture exactly where you wanted. Overhead trim was no problem, and the mechanical flaps make for consistant flap settings on approaches/landings. The low wing/mechanical flap setup can come in handy in an emergency.


(Saw that demonstrated.. Engine out, not enough altitude to reach the runway, pilot didn't deploy the flaps until about 15 feet off the ground. When he grabbed the first notch, he ballooned up to about 50 feet, let it settle to 15, and repeated the proceedure twice more. It gave him JUST enough extra to make the runway. Later told the folks he had read about this somewhere and had practiced it with an instructor, so he knew it would work.)


Down side.. It's deffinately NOT a four passenger airplane. Flew from Indianapolis to just north of Milwaukee with my wife and 5 year old son. Three smallish bags and enough fuel for the trip and 45 minute reserve. That put us at gross and the wife and boy had to ride in back to stay within weight/balance limits. With instructor and me plus full fuel, we had to throw 100+ pounds of sandbags in the baggage compartment to stay within CG.

Another minor problem has to do with trim/flap coordination on approach. In the 140, we'd crank in full nose up trim and use elevator to hold attitude when we pulled flaps. Initially, that was nose down force, becoming fairly neutral at the flair. However, all other Cherokee 150/160/180's I flew exhibited a very distinct and abrupt pitch up attitude when flown in this configuration.

Qualification here.. I've got over 100 hours, mostly in PA28's, but some in C172's and AA5's. All of that was while we were still living in the mid-west. Haven't been able to afford to fly since moving to California, nearly 20 years ago. So, the experience and recollections are a little stale. :-)

Jerry

------------------
Comments and opinions are my own and do not reflect those of my employer.

[piper pilot]

you seem to be going through the same things that I went through. Depends on who you talk to to which plane you will consider. First look at cost a nice 140 will run around $25,000 give or take. A nice 172(which is very comparible in useful load and fuel burn) will cost about $35,000 give or take. The 140 does sink alot faster than a 172 but that sink rate sure helps out when landing in a strong crosswind(she won't try to float down the runway) There are a few drawbacks to a 140 versus a 172. Some of which are less room I'm 6'2" tall and weigh about 155 lbs I have plenty of room but any back seat passengers are a little cramped, another I have trouble keeping the nose wheel off the ground when landing. It seems once the main gear touches the noise wheel touches and I'm pulled all the way out on the yoke. One other problem with the 140, if you want to use your plane to train for single IFR rating msot of the older 140's don't have the standard T panel and don't have the room for one unless you change the panel(and that is expensive). The plane that I have is a 68 model with a 0320 lycoming she cruises (on a calm day at 110 to 114 kts true airspeed) but on average at about 105knts true. warm summer days 90 degrees 900 ft elevation she will climb out at around 500FPM. Fuel consumption usually runs about 9GPH. If i had to do over again I would by my 140 again. I LOVE MINE.
good luck making your choice
piper pilot

[robatc]

If I had the money, I'd buy one right now. I only have about 20 hours in our club's 140 (1967) and I really enjoy it. For about 22K, you get a lot of plane. The numbers others have posted seem about right (105 kts. cruise) but it has great range on full tanks. For two people and lots of baggage, it's a good plane.

You have to ask yourself, how often do I carry 4 people? Two, three times a year. Rent.

[djschaut]

Sam,

There is a good article on used Cherokees in the December, '99 issue of AOPA pilot.

------------------
DJSchaut

[wflynn]

I just got my ticket and bought my 1st aircraft, a 1964 Cherokee 140. I love the plane, it is fun to fly and beats the heck out of the Tommahawk that I trained on. Yes you do have to watch your weight and balance if you want to start to put adults in the back, but for the most part it carries my wife and I and some baggage without any effort. I would recommend a Cherokee to anyone.

New PPL

[oinkerir]

I have a lot of time in a 140/150hp. The one I have driven - a 66 - the most, has been stripped and polished and cruises at 120 mph indicated. On the other hand a friend has a painted (original paint in poor shape)140/140hp that only indicates 100mph.

Now granted I live in Southeast Alaska and most days are standard days, but, I am never worried about gross weight ( I do stay within limits). Fill it to the tabs, 17 gallons per side, and you can fly at 120 mph for 3 hours and still have plenty of reserve. Fill the tanks, 25 per side, and you had better have a strong bladder. The book says 8 1/2 per hour but I plan for 10 per and fly at 2350 rpms.

I land this airplane on a 1200' unimproved strip on a regular basis and have no problems even with 4 FAA (170 lb)adults aboard.

The plane, in my opinion, is the best dollar for dollar value going. It does feel heavy on aproach when you close the throttle, compared to a Cessna, but it lands easily and with regular maintenance the gear is bullet proof.

Trim tab, who cares? Once you get used to it you will ask yourself why Cessna never figured this one out.

As far as the brakes go, the brake handle is located close to your right hand and works well. I find myself reaching for it when I drive other planes that have toe or heal brakes, habit I guess. Don't worry about it, if you want buy one that is equiped with toe brakes or have them installed. I'll bet that once you fly the plane you won't think twice about reaching for the brake lever.

Approach speeds in a Piper vs Cessna is in my mind the most significant difference. Plan on landing (a gross loaded) Piper about 10kts faster than a Cessna and when you flare the plane will land, I mean right now! Unless you have a very strong head wind or are extreemly light there is NO float. This plane wants to land which is great in a strong cross wind.

My wife works for a local 135 operator and he had over 30 Pipers from Chieftains to Archers and just about everything in between and I have flown most of them. GREAT airplanes you won't be disapointed.

[Ntr1]

Originally Posted by matt

WRONG. I got a 140. I take four adults all the time. It's called MATH. Useful load = 630 (discounting fuel). At 36 gallons, thats four adults wouldn't you say? I find little difference in handling.... mostly just feet room. As for the overhead trim... what are you... A BABy??? Cranking that baby is no problemo.

Me and my ap instructor are goin back and forth about what it can carry i saind i looked at the specs and this one has a 337 for a 160 conversion with the back seat mod it says 665 with full fuel 50 gal so if you - 16 gal that is 100 lbs so you could carry 765 lbs right??

[Ntr1]

you said you fly with 4 people al the time how much total weight??
thanks nick

[Ntr1]

I meant 17 gal is 102 lbs sorry I do do math!!