Which plane is more enjoyable to fly? Cessna 172 or Piper Warrior?

Long story short: Was a student pilot but haven't flown for years. About to pick it up again and must choose between these two planes.

I like the visability of the overhead wing Cessna...but the Piper looks like fun!

17 Answers

Relevance
  • 8 years ago
    Best answer

    I liked the cessna 172 better. More visability below and with the high wing and 40 degree's of flaps, you can get in down on the runway even if your a little fast. It will come down level like an elevator. With the Warrior, they are underpowered for 4 people, and the low wing tends to "float in ground effect" if your not right on the numbers. They seem to eat up a lot of runway. Also, there is the added complexity of the fuel pumps on takeoff and landing and reduced visibility. I also felt there was more passenger room in the 172 and enjoyed that over the Warrior. The Cessna was more like driving a van and was roomy and very perdictable and the stalls break clean.

    If you want to go cheap, fly a Cessna 152. Its tight inside but you can build air time cheaper in it.

    Source(s): I have PP license
  • 3 years ago

    Piper Warrior Vs Cessna 172

  • Anonymous
    4 years ago

    This Site Might Help You.

    RE:

    Which plane is more enjoyable to fly? Cessna 172 or Piper Warrior?

    Long story short: Was a student pilot but haven't flown for years. About to pick it up again and must choose between these two planes.

    I like the visability of the overhead wing Cessna...but the Piper looks like fun!

    Source(s): plane enjoyable fly cessna 172 piper warrior: https://biturl.im/Bja6v
  • MK
    Lv 4
    8 years ago

    I did the majority of my training in various models of 172s and don't have very many complaints about them, I think they're great planes for training... the only Piper I've had a significant amount of time in is a Seminole so I can't help you out on how differently the 172 and the Warrior handle and "feel."

    I agree with you on the visibility you get in a 172, it makes ground reference maneuvers much easier than in a low wing, and you have a better view of the runway when you're about to touch down. If you're more used to a high wing than a low wing, you'll be more used to flaring more while landing, but that is definitely something that you can get adjusted to with practice... it took me a while to get the feel of a low-flare landing in low wings after having flown only Cessnas for the previous 2 years. Also, when taxiing in a 172, you can clear higher obstacles like snowdrifts at the side of the taxiway.

    Source(s): Commercially-licensed pilot, CFI applicant.
  • What do you think of the answers? You can sign in to give your opinion on the answer.
  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    They both will fly pretty similar. It's all preference. I trained in a low-wing piper tomahawk, and fly an Arrow pretty frequently (basically a Warrior with a bigger engine, retractable gear, and a constant speed prop) and I've flown a 172 a lot.

    People have preferences over the controls (cessnas have push-pull throttles vs. levers, Pipers have manual flaps vs. electric) but I've flown both types and it takes about 2 minutes with either before I don't even notice a difference. Although I do prefer the manual flaps. Electrical failures are a fairly mundane problem in VFR, and just that much more mundane when you still have flaps. But landing a 172 with no flaps is a non-issue.

    People will argue about the low-wing vs. high-wing aerodynamics. In those planes you won't notice much difference. That always annoys me, people will talk about the natural roll stability of a high-wing, neglecting though that natural stability exists, all they do is built the low-wings with more dihedral to pretty much remove that difference.

    Visibility-wise, you're not a passenger staring straight down. You're the pilot, and nothing immediately beneath you is of significant interest. You can see plenty of ground with the low-wing if that's your thing, but even better, you can actually see where you're turning. In a high-wing, you always have to be cautious because if you turn left, you can't see left anymore. It's all preference.

  • 8 years ago

    The Cessna I think.

    Better view down. Better takeoff, climb, and landing performance. Way better pitch and yaw control. Much, much, much easier to get in and out of (two doors, no wing to climb on, only the Cessna Cardinal is better with the bigger doors and no struts). Shade from the sun and shelter from the rain. Real windows that open for hot days instead of having the door open on the opposite side and your hand out the vent window trying to scoop air in from the prop. My 172 also has skylights so it actually gives a better view straight up.

    The Piper is definitely the sportier looking of the two and a bit more stable on the ground because of the wide gear. Some people like the control quadrants of the post 1968 Pipers but I don't really. Standard fuel capacity is higher for the Warrior as well, but be careful you don't fill it and take a bunch of people with you.

    Source(s): Flown both.
  • 4 years ago

    I started flying in a Cessna and from the very moment I took off, I did not like it. I switched to a Warrior and have loved flying it from the start. The Cessna is TOO little inside and not comfortable but the Wrrior fells much more open and doesn't restrict you vision.

  • 8 years ago

    I would probably fly the Cessna

    Pipers are too hard to get into and out of.. Pipers seriously need a second door

  • JetDoc
    Lv 7
    8 years ago

    The Warrior is faster, the Cessna is easier to get in and out of, and has better visibility to the ground. Also, the high wings provide some shade on hot days. You pay your money and you take your choice.

  • 8 years ago

    flip a coin. both planes have good points. both have bad points.

    i find the cessna cockpits longer but narrower. i have ample legroom in a 172, but am rubbing shoulders with anybody in the right seat. the first time i flew one i instinctively put the seat all the way back and couldn't reach the pedals. :-)

    the pipers have more shoulder room, but i fly with the seat all the way back, eliminating any possibility of anybody sitting behind me.

Still have questions? Get answers by asking now.