IncipientSpin wrote:After reading all the above comments, I'm thinking a Pacer/TriPacer is the plane for me. 2 up with gear for dirt ops, and wife and kids back and forth from BOI to North Idaho. I realize I don't get to go fast for the budget I have, so I'm totally content with that. Guess I need to start looking for a good one.

Check facebook marketplace. There one on this side of the state for cheap. I know nothing about it but the pics look good but the price makes me wonder. Might be worth taking a drive.

I spent some time sitting (on the ground) in a Piper Colt (someone can probably extrapolate on the differences to a Pacer but my understanding is: not many) and wasn't in love. Leg room was fine but my head was definitely in contact with the ceiling liner the whole time. Makes me think a Pacer with the skylight would be fine, but otherwise no dice. Three inches taller than me? I dunno.

The Piper Pacer is the widest cockpit for that price range. Great airplane.

unipus wrote:I spent some time sitting (on the ground) in a Piper Colt (someone can probably extrapolate on the differences to a Pacer but my understanding is: not many) and wasn't in love. Leg room was fine but my head was definitely in contact with the ceiling liner the whole time. Makes me think a Pacer with the skylight would be fine, but otherwise no dice. Three inches taller than me? I dunno.

I think the Colt was pretty similar to the Tri-Pacer, except for the smaller engine (108 hp Lycoming O-235, IIRC). I flew one my father-in-law owned for a few hours, and it was fun. Lower power meant anemic climb rate, but it was cheap to fly! The power-off glide angle was comparable to that of a brick, but it was easy to get used to after a few trips around the pattern. (Probably didn't help either the climb rate or the power-off descent rate that we were operating out of El Paso, at a field elevation of about 5000 ft, and a DA or probably 8500 - it was HOT!) I had a lot of fun flying it!

Colt vs TriPacer:
O-235 vs O-290 or O-320, 2 seats vs 4, no rear door, no baggage door, no flaps.

hotrod180 wrote:Colt vs TriPacer:
O-235 vs O-290 or O-320, 2 seats vs 4, no rear door, no baggage door, no flaps.

Oh, yeah! Forgot there were only two seats (at my weight, they all hold only 2 people, anyway), but definitely remember the “no flaps” part. Didn’t miss them on landing. No idea if they would help on takeoff.

In my opinion the Tri-Pacers are inexpensive and plentiful enough I would not look at any of the lower power or less feature-full options. The flaps, while not big fowler flaps, do help with shorter takeoff ground roll for sure and are nice to have on landing though they do slip well.