# Cessna 172S Skyhawk SP vs Piper PA-28-181 Archer

Page: https://www.aerscheduler.com/aircraft/compare/cessna-172s-vs-piper-pa-28-181
Guides: https://www.aerscheduler.com/aircraft/cessna-172s, https://www.aerscheduler.com/aircraft/piper-pa-28-181

## Where they differ

- The Cessna 172S fleet is younger: half of those registered were built by 2009, against 1986 for the Piper PA-28-181.
- Most Cessna 172Ss have the Lycoming IO-360; most Piper PA-28-181s the Lycoming O-360.
- The Piper PA-28-181 burns more fuel in a typical cruise: about 9.5 gallons an hour against 9.
- The Cessna 172S carries more airframe ADs with a repeat action, 5 against 3: inspections that come back for as long as the AD applies.
- Mechanics report the Cessna 172S's reciprocating engine cylinder section most, and the Piper PA-28-181's fuselage miscellaneous structure.

## Side by side

| | Cessna 172S Skyhawk SP | Piper PA-28-181 Archer |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Registered in the US | 3,069 | 3,425 |
| Built | 1998 to 2026 | 1975 to 2026 |
| Half built by | 2009 | 1986 |
| Seats | 4 | 4 |
| Most common engine | Lycoming IO-360 | Lycoming O-360 |
| Typical cruise fuel burn | 9 gal/hr | 9.5 gal/hr |
| Engine overhaul interval | 2,000 hr | 2,000 hr |
| Current airframe ADs | 39 | 59 |
| Airframe ADs with a repeat action | 5 | 3 |
| Current ADs on the main engine | 29 | 24 |
| Service Difficulty Reports | 383 (124.8 per 1,000) | 790 (230.7 per 1,000) |
| Most-reported system | Reciprocating Engine Cylinder Section | Fuselage Miscellaneous Structure |
| Accidents since 2008 | 255 (83.1 per 1,000) | 130 (38.0 per 1,000) |
| Fatal accidents since 2008 | 32 | 19 |
| Most common accident | Hard landing | Loss of control on ground |

Report and accident counts are not rates: the hours each model flies are not published. Sources: the FAA aircraft registry, Airworthiness Directives and Service Difficulty Reports, and the NTSB aviation accident database.