Recently I have been shopping around at Pacers, PA-22/20s in particular. I noticed that some of the older Pa-22/20s (pre-1956?) seem to have a large panel and a front bench seat instead of the buckets. Do these older aircraft have less leg room then the post-1956 tri-pacers? Over the tri-pacer production run was there any variation in interior dimensions?

My only Pacer experience was in a 1957 PA-22/20 and that was a little tight due to the fact I am 6-2. I heard rumors the earlier Tri-Pacers were smaller inside and want to decide if there are certain models years I should rule out during my search.

Thanks

fern_hopper wrote:Recently I have been shopping around at Pacers, PA-22/20s in particular. I noticed that some of the older Pa-22/20s (pre-1956?) seem to have a large panel and a front bench seat instead of the buckets. Do these older aircraft have less leg room then the post-1956 tri-pacers? Over the tri-pacer production run was there any variation in interior dimensions?

My only Pacer experience was in a 1957 PA-22/20 and that was a little tight due to the fact I am 6-2. I heard rumors the earlier Tri-Pacers were smaller inside and want to decide if there are certain models years I should rule out during my search.

Thanks

From what I recall, the bigger panels didn't start until 57, but many older ones have been updated. I also seem to remember reading that 57 and on were the roomier ones, if at all. I've been in various model years and they all seem to fit the same, just a little tight, but doable. I know this is answered in detail over on shortwingpipers.org.

Thanks, I will go search over there. Someone had told me that the pre-1956 pacers had less leg and shoulder room, especially those that came with the bench seat.

fern_hopper wrote:Thanks, I will go search over there. Someone had told me that the pre-1956 pacers had less leg and shoulder room, especially those that came with the bench seat.

Most everyone I talked to with what I was looking for said get a 57 or later.

I believe 56 is when they got the 13 spar wing for the higher gross and Vne. They also got the split bench set at that time as well. They do cost more also.

I owned a 1956 PA22/20-150, and I fly and maintain a 1952 PA20-135.
The PA22/20 had the individual adjustable front seats with the Williams toe brakes.
The PA20 is stock with a front bench seat. At 6ft 2in I don't notice any difference
Between the two. Decide the mission, IFR/VFR, buy the lightest,
most closely aligned with your mission, best one you can afford.
Great airplanes, I personally would buy on condition, equipment, over model year.
Dave

mine was a 57 with the split seats.. when I bought it it had the johnson brake from the factory.. I bought and installed the williams toe brakes and there was less leg room which Williams acknowleges.. I'm 5'10, and I always felt a little leg cramped but I learned to live with it. Loved my PA 22. but it needed more power and more room for camping gear. If you can find one with the aux tank under the back seat BUY it... you won't find an aux tank anywhere for sale.. I found one , bought it and put it in and it was the second best thing I did for improvement...That extra 8 gallons is great...

1956 has the individual/split front seats and large panel with center stack radios. The difference between wide body and narrow body Pacers is in how the door sill sheet metal is installed. The frames themselves are identical. You get an extra 2 inches at the radio panel in the wide body.

Use the Univair toe brakes and they do not give up as much leg room as the Williams do. Install one of my skylights for head room. I am 6'1" and am perfectly comfortable in the front seat of our '56 PA-22/20... A little cramped in our '56 PA-22 without the skylight, but that is in the process of being changed at the moment. (Yes, we have one of each)

IMO You don't get any better ground control of the aircraft with individual braking on the Tri-Pacer. The nose gear limits that too much. For best braking on the tri, install a set of Cleveland disk brakes with one of our vented booster master cylinders. Bleed properly with the Johnson bar adjusted right and you can slide the tires if you are not careful ....

you're probably right on the toe brakes vs the johnson bar but I couldn't get used to the J bar reaching for it on roll out and such...and if the univair brakes give you more room go for it... I didn't know all that much then but if i had it all to do over again I'd probably go for the univair for the added leg room

I've installed 3 of 'em, and I gotta say that Brian's skylight is one of the best investments for a PA22 that there is! I've got one more that's going to get it, as soon as he buys the plane!
John

not that it applies to me but can we see some pictures of that skylight... Didn't have that when I had my Tri rock but I probably would have gone for it ....always liked the few cessna's that had skylights and I know there's a STC for them on the maule but I haven't looked into the cost and such;

Brian - Steve's Aircraft wrote:1956 has the individual/split front seats and large panel with center stack radios. The difference between wide body and narrow body Pacers is in how the door sill sheet metal is installed. The frames themselves are identical. You get an extra 2 inches at the radio panel in the wide body.

Thanks for the info. Do the narrow body pacers have less shoulder room also because of the door sill? Can the door sill be modified?

iceman wrote:not that it applies to me but can we see some pictures of that skylight... Didn't have that when I had my Tri rock but I probably would have gone for it ....always liked the few cessna's that had skylights and I know there's a STC for them on the maule but I haven't looked into the cost and such;

Some pictures here, http://www.stevesaircraft.com/skylightstc.php also a bunch on their Facebook page.

hardtailjohn wrote:I've installed 3 of 'em, and I gotta say that Brian's skylight is one of the best investments for a PA22 that there is! I've got one more that's going to get it, as soon as he buys the plane!
John

I can second, I have one that's in progress on a rebuild and the instructions and pictures are great. I will have to see if I can find some in progress pics.

Hi Fern_hopper,

When it comes to PA-22’s there are two basic versions. The early has a flat instrument panel and a bench seat for both pilot and copilot. The later version starting around 1956 has the humped instrument panel with center stack radios and individual/split seats for the pilot and copilot. With that said now some specifics. The actual tubular airframe is the same or both and made on the same jug, but the later split seat version has more interior cabin width by around three inches as compared to the earlier bench seat PA-22. Piper accomplished this by widening the sheet metal that is welded to the tubular frame and creates the outside shape of the fuselage. So if you look down the side of an early PA-22 its lines just behind the cabin blind into the tail section much better than the later PA-22. The later PA-22 has a very sharp inward turn just behind the cabin because of the added cabin width. The instrument panel on the later version is about 2-inches farther forward then the earlier PA-22, for additional leg room. If you look close the flat instrument panel start right at the vertical tube that the forward door is hinged off of. The later humped instrument panel has been pushed well forward of this tube. Both of these major changes were to provide more interior room. The positive side of these changes is more interior room, which will allow a 5’5” pilot reach the rudder peddles with a 6’4” copilot not being forced into the fetal position. The only overall negative I have found is the whole thing adds weight. One other thing, if you add toe brakes (and who wouldn’t) this definitely compounds the problem because it moves the toe pedals rearward around 1 ½ “.
Some people think it’s a simple thing to convert an early bench seat set-up to the split seat set-up and it’s NOT. I have only done it by cutting up a wrecked late model and welding everything into the early airframe and it’s still painful.

Hope this help’s.

Rick

just get a Maule!!!!

iceman wrote:just get a Maule!!!!

I was looking. Until I got the insurance quote

fern_hopper wrote:

iceman wrote:just get a Maule!!!!

I was looking. Until I got the insurance quote

What?!?!?! $1000 more a year is a show stopper on a Maule??!?!?!

Tadpole wrote:What?!?!?! $1000 more a year is a show stopper on a Maule??!?!?!

Try more like $1700/yr!!! AVEMCO said is had something to do with the crazy things people do in a Maule plus my 150 Pacer hrs vs. 0 Maule hrs.

mine's about 1200 a year... but then I had a ground loop about 6 years ago...