10 replies to this topic

[El Cobrador]

I'm not sure if this has been touched on yet.

1. 737-600 vs. 737-700: what are the advantages of one over the other?
2. 737-800 vs. 737-900: same question.

Thanks!

[Will101]

1. 736s have more range but a lower pax, i'd personally prefer the 700
2. 738s have more range but lower pax on here but in reality a 739er with bladder tanks can have a max range somewhere near a 772 max capacity range I'd go for the 757-200 i mean 737-900

[Mobeer]

-600 and -700 both carry 149 passengers
-600 uses less fuel, turns around and flies faster
-700 can use some very short runways

-800 is a solid earner that replaces the -400
-900 is 10mph faster but otherwise inferior in all respects and best forgotten
[all figures from world R0 stats]

[El Cobrador]

Thanks to both for the input! I'm contemplating future replacements for my -300s and -400s.

[bigbadcrusher]

If you get the -900, wait for the ER version to come out. It has a max pax of 220, and a range I believe is longer than the 737-800.

[El Cobrador]

I currently fly the 733, 734, and 752; When I upgrade, I'll quite possibly go -700, -800, and -900ER

[mxax-ai]

the only routes on which the -900ER can't replace the 752 is where the max. range or min. runway are used About -600/-700: both can carry 149 PAX, but in reality the -600 holds less, as it is noticably shorter. I would've guessed that fitting 149 seats into both would result in a lower rep for the -600?

[Will101]

I would've guessed that fitting 149 seats into both would result in a lower rep for the -600?

or a better reputation for the -700

[the DOC]

600 vs 700=700
800 vs 900=800

[El Cobrador]

600 vs 700=700
800 vs 900=800

That's pretty much the conclusion that I've come to as well. Thanks!

[Nexus8]

800 as everyon has said
But if you are not worried about runway the 600 wins as it still fits in a 5000 ft