Does anyone have experience with the venerable Piper PA-22 Tri-Pacer as a backcountry aircraft? In particular I'm interested in the landing gear and how tough (or not) it is. Thanks in advance.

I don't know about backcountry, but I've landed one on a number of grass strips and never had any trouble - the bungees work pretty well. If you're in the market I've got a 1953 w/135hp for sale, currently listed on barnstormers, pm me if you'd like details.

Thanks for your reply. I fly from an airport at 7,000 MSL so am leaning towards a 160 hp Tri-Pacer. I'll check out your ad on Barnstormers.

Bill

Planeman,
Be carefull of the prop clearance from the ground and the nose wheel. You can buy a conventional gear conversion for just a little more money than a Tri-Pacer costs. Then get the STC for the 8.50s and put VGs on. You'll have a great time.

Mike

Had a pa 22 for 10 years and flew it all over Idaho every summer on my 2 week vacation... Lets seee.. been to JC, Big creek, Thomas, Indian, Elk City, Chamberlain, Warren, Idaho City, Shearer, Smiley, Atlanta,Graham,Garden Valley,Bruce meadows, Warm springs, Dixie, Dixie town, Landmark, Cayuse creek, Upper loon, and Sulphur,,, Had no problem with the venerable Tri Rock.. It's a great back country plane cause it doesn't float.. you can put it on the numbers every time... I had a 57 150 but I put 160 pistons in it and had my prop flattened out to 53.. Also had VG's The biggest improvement was the flat prop.... If you get the tri rock do the prop.... at sea level I would get red line in climb out and in Idaho I got off JC with my full load of camping gear, 175 pounds ,and my fat ass before the first outhouse...I never went more than half a runway before getting off at any strip up there... I even did it one year with my Brother in law in the right seat. We fished upper loon and late in the day we still got off before half the runway was gone... It's the prop.... It's all about RPM's up there , and of course horsepower, which is why I sold it and bought a M4 Maule...just stay light on the nose wheel and try not to hit any critter holes,, especially at Chamberlain...

by the way.... Look at the nose wheel on a Tri gear Maule... Same nose gear as on your Tripacer....

A gentleman at Emmett, Idaho airport had a PA-22 160HP (might have been 180hp now that I think about it) and he flew that plane all over the Idaho backcountry on a regular basis. I had thought about buying it, but decided it wasn't the right plane for my big azz. I never got in it, but heard that visibility isn't that great for a tall person. But he said it was a great performer up in them mountains (just like some points Iceman mentioned). And I believe him, because he's one of the most experienced and respected pilots/ex-crop dusters in Idaho.

As most of you guys know, I am a bit of a Pacer fanatic. My company owns 4 STC's that can be used on the PA-22 series. Our Rudder trim system and skylight can be used on all models. Our constant speed prop engine conversion on only the 22/20 conversion and our master brake on only the tri-pacer. I have ownership of a 1956 PA22/20, Demer tips, VG's and leading edge cuff with 0-360 180HP conversion (one time STC with fixed pitch) and a 56 pitch prop. We also have a 1956 PA22 Tri-Pacer that is stock with 0-320 150HP also with 56 pitch prop. Iceman is correct when it comes to the prop pitch. It makes all the difference in the world to get that engine turning up the RPM's on the takeoff roll.

As for the Tri-Pacer. A 160 HP model would be the best. Currently, there is not an STC conversion available to install the 0-360 engine on a Tri-Pacer. At this moment, all of the STC's available (including ours) requires that the airplane be converted to a tail wheel. The main reason for this is because the carburetor air box sits 3 inches lower and 3 inches forward on the 0-360 engines putting it right in the middle of the nose gear strut. The visibility aspect can be improved by installing a skylight under our skylight STC paperwork.

I have a good friend and customer that owns a early 135 Tri-Pacer with a 160 horse conversion. He is all of 400 pounds of very big man. I have personally seen him load his airplane full of camping gear up to the headliner with no rear seat, full of fuel in the tanks and one of the original rear seat aux tanks and is 200 pound buddy in the right seat. I have seen that airplane take off from our 3000 foot grass/dirt runway and head of to Johnson Creek to go camping...It is an amazingly capable airplane for its diminutive little stature.

And now for a picture of the PA-22 that is in our shop getting a recover of the fuselage.


This is the Pacer that we used to get the 0-360 constant speed prop conversion certified.


Our PA22/20 fixed pitch airplane.

I had the aux tank also . It is another great plus if you can find one.... They are scarce as hens teeth....also if you want to be impressed try a canyon turn in the tripacer or pacer... those stubby wings are a definite plus in the back country... I also had the droop tips on my last PA 22... I feel they actually don't do anything to enhance performance but what does is the extended part of the aileron and just a little more wing area when they are on... THey look rather lousy but there are a bunch of Pacers/tri's with them on..My first one didn't have them and the difference wasn't all that noticible...I used to be loaded floor to ceiling in the back with the seats out and if performed fantastically... rough strips aren't a problem... Piper produced a film way back in the 50's showing the tripacer taking off from a plowed field across the furrows in the field.. Not that I would do that but I actually saw the film once... with 600x 6's all around you can go to just about any strip up in Idaho or Utah, of course using due dilligence with the nose gear... Stay light on the n ose with back pressure all the way to taxi speed and you should never have a problem unless you hit one of those critter holes at Chamberlain.... Bet you're wondering why I keep mentioning Chamberlain and the critter holes there....

That is great information, thanks very much to all. I had hoped to hear positive info regarding both the PA-22 and 22/20. They do seem to be very capable airplanes and good bang for the buck, although I've never flown in either.

I currently fly a C-180 (with the back seat removed) that has safely carried my wife and I out west and back from our home in FL several times. We've had so much junk in the back on a couple of those trips that people commented that we looked like the Beverly Hillbillies! But hey, it's been a great airplane that has a reasonable cruise speed and is quite comfortable on long trips.

Now we are finally relocating out west (NM) to retire and the C-180 is more airplane than we need. We just need an airplane to carry the two of us with some camping gear for weekend trips. It seems that a PA-22 or 22/20 would fit the bill nicely. When we're not going camping it's just me in the plane having fun locally. The wife couldn't care less about local flights, but she's more than happy to go on a trip just about anywhere.

I can't wait to further explore the western states by air once we get settled in.

Thanks again for your comments.

Bill

Best bang for the buck out there.

My first plane was a PA22/20 with 8.00's and a flat prop. Since then I've had two Cessna 180's and to be perfectly honest my strip selection isn't much different. No, I'm not talking about extreme short stuff but any thing that's on a sectional is fair game. Certainly most anything in Idaho.

I would hazzard to say that if I had a PA20/160 with a climb prop there would be an extremely short list of places I wouldn't go.

This is my first post here. I have both a PA-22 and a Cessna-180 and agree that a Tripacer will go almost anywhere in the west. I must ask though, if you own the 180, why do you want to trade for a PA-22? The 180 is one of the best Backcountry/Bush/Highcountry airplanes ever built.
Jim

Next month's cover story in Plane and Pilot: "Man Evolves Into Ape! Trades Cessna 180 for Tri Pacer"

I too, fail to see the logic of downgrading from a 180 to a Pacer when moving out west.

First move out West, fly the 180 for a year, and if unhappy.... fly the 180 more.

yeah I was gonna ask why you wanted to "upgrade" to a Tripacer from a 180 but you answered that... I gather it's got to do with fuel costs and insurance...Sorry 180 guys,,,, just pulling your legs....on my long legs going to and from Idaho I routinely got 7-8 gallons an hour with the PA 22 though my cruise speed was about 120 with the flat prop... well on second thought maybe 115....

iceman wrote:........ if you want to be impressed try a canyon turn in the tripacer or pacer.......

You mean a hammerhead?

I have been interested in the Pacers (wth bigger engines of course)at different times. Seemed like you got a lot for your money. I was concerned about the glide with an engine failure. Had the idea that they might have the glide of a 53' Desota. That was always a big plus to me with the Cessnas,they will fly relatively slow w/o power(Shit does happen, I have been well aquainted w/Murphy for a long time).

Do they have a decent glide(speed) w/engine failure?

Thanks Gary

Don't know about glide.. with engine failure... Never tried it... I figured "Failure is not an Option"....I figure pretty much you are F***ed no matter wht you're flying up in the mountains... If I can remember back that far... It was "establish 60 MPH glide speed then look for a flat spot, then Pray....

From my experience flying a PA-22/20 the pacer has a glide ratio somewhere between a rock and grand piano. They don't float like a cessna does. That being said there are a kick in the pants to fly! Only downside I found is that being 6-2 it takes some manuevering to fit into the Pacer, and you have to get friendly with your passenger when making full control aileron inputs, I find my knees sit right where the yoke needs to be.

I would have to agree with iceman though, when your low and slow I guess you are F****ed no matter what you are flying.

-Matt

I have about 200hrs in my PA 22/20-160. The glide ratio is very poor. I have been pulling the power lately when in the vicinity of the airport and trying to make the runway. Even now, I am surprised by how fast the airplane comes down. Do not pull full flaps until you have the landing spot made.

If you are familiar with the glide, you can use it to your advantage when needing to dump altitude, which can be an advantage/safety benefit if you are aware of it.

Also, when landing in a tight spot, you can bring the airplane in on the power.......just pull the power and the you are going to land on whatever is beneath you

Great airplane, but not a cessna which is okay, unless that is what you are expecting.