All things RV-8A

Jay Honeck

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Jun 6, 2008
Messages
11,571
Location
Ingleside, TX
Display Name

Display name:
Jay Honeck
Well, now, kids, that last thread spiraled out of control in a pretty dismal way. Let's try to keep this one on topic, shall we?

Now that I'm seriously considering purchasing an RV-8A, I would love to hear from those with actual RV time. How do they fly? What are the known issues? What should we look for in a pre-buy?

Anyone got real numbers on speed, rate of climb, and range?
 
The numbers on Van's web site are very real, depending on the engine & prop combo. The 8 is an incredible example of " Total Performance". Travels fast, can go slow, economical, holds it's value and should appreciate as aviation recovers.

http://www.vansaircraft.com/public/rv8perf.htm

It's been called the "Poor man's P-51".

"The almost perfect control balance and harmony and the excellent visibility make aerobatics a delight. At the aerobatic gross weight of 1600 lbs., the RV-8/8A complies with the +6/-3G standards of the FAA’s Aerobatic Category and can still carry two people, making it possible for a new pilot to get aerobatic instruction before he or she starts rolling and looping."

About the only negative things I have heard about ownership is the tandom seating. This limits panel space, and the wife might not like staring at the back of your head. On the other hand the view for the pilot is like none other.
 
Last edited:
Jay, I started another thread on the very same topic. I thought the one you had set up really had some life left in it. I'll repeat what I said there, most builders keep logs. I wouldn't purchase an Ex/Ab airframe without one. The EAA has the technical counselor program. You might be able to get a Technical Counselor familiar with the breed to look over your prospective aircraft and it's logs. Might ease your mind to a considerable extent.

The other thing I mentioned and will repeat is there really isn't that much room for luggage in an RV, at least not that I can see. If you expect to take your lovely spouse and saunter off for a week somewhere, you'll likely be shipping your bags. With what Mrs. Steingar packs, I know I would. The back seat of your beautiful Piper product is good for more than just passengers.
 
Well, now, kids, that last thread spiraled out of control in a pretty dismal way. Let's try to keep this one on topic, shall we?

Now that I'm seriously considering purchasing an RV-8A, I would love to hear from those with actual RV time. How do they fly? What are the known issues? What should we look for in a pre-buy?

Anyone got real numbers on speed, rate of climb, and range?

I've got 850 hours in the -6. The numbers for my airplane and virtually all RV's are very close to Van's estimates, which are listed on their webpage. The big performance variable is the prop - even moreso than the engine choice. I have a fixed pitch wood prop optimized for cruise. That means that loaded to the gills in 95F weather and 90% humidity, the airplane needs 1,000' of runway and climbs at 800 FPM because the engine is only turning 2400 rpm. A constant speed prop changes that equation dramatically, but adds weight, expense, and complexity. The fixed pitch prop is a good compromise for me, but others prefer the CS.

Handling? Much more responsive than a Cessna or Piper. An A/P is nice for serious cross country work. Loaded towards the aft end of the CG range, the handling changes. Familiarize yourself with this before you get to Fisk. Low and slow isn't the place for exploring that portion of the envelope. It isn't scary or dangerous, but it is different.

The tailwheel version is a pussycat.

The nosewheel version is easier except there have been too many nosegear failures, IMO. The key is to hold the nosegear off the ground as long as possible on landing, to lift it off as soon as possible on takeoff, and to use the elevator to keep as much weight off the nose as possible. Oh, and avoid bumpy fields. There are thousands of posts in the RV forums about these issues. There are even some aftermarket solutions for the problem. I haven't seen any first-hand, but they are probably worth a look.

By the way, friends with RV-8's have opined that the 200 hp engine with a C/S prop is too nose heavy, which may exacerbate the nosegear problems. The 180hp engine is lighter and a better choice, even with the C/S prop.

If you get interested in one, find an RV expert who isn't affiliated with the airplane and don't hesitate to pay for a serious pre-purchase inspection. These are simple airplanes and easy to build, but they are not idiot proof. You want all fairings removed, including the seat pans and empennage fairing so you can see all of the control systems and all of the major structural joints. You also want a thorough inspection of the engine and system installation. It is easy for a creative builder to "improve" something to the point where it is a problem. One recent story in the RV world was a guy who tied both of his electronic ignitions to a single breaker. When the breaker went bad, he lost both ignition systems. A careful inspection by a tech counselor, IA, A&P, DAR, or whoever should have nipped that one in the bud.

I haven't personally seen any workmanship horror stories with RV's, but I have seen hidden butcher jobs in other makes. People with $ signs in their eyes have been known to sell airplanes with some pretty bad problems.
 
BTW, I want to publicly apologize to you and Wayne for my part in shutting down your thread.

Back to the RV-8

Climb rate is easily 2,000fpm with 200hp. Ask me how I know. :D

The tail dragger version is (and all TG RV's are) very docile and manageable. Very good cross wind capability, and docile stall characteristics. The "A" version is slightly faster that the TG model.

Jay, we can talk about it all day long and never come close to the feeling of actually flying one. Go for a fly and you tell us when you quit grinning. :D
 
Last edited:
Jay, I started another thread on the very same topic. I thought the one you had set up really had some life left in it. I'll repeat what I said there, most builders keep logs. I wouldn't purchase an Ex/Ab airframe without one. The EAA has the technical counselor program. You might be able to get a Technical Counselor familiar with the breed to look over your prospective aircraft and it's logs. Might ease your mind to a considerable extent.

The other thing I mentioned and will repeat is there really isn't that much room for luggage in an RV, at least not that I can see. If you expect to take your lovely spouse and saunter off for a week somewhere, you'll likely be shipping your bags. With what Mrs. Steingar packs, I know I would. The back seat of your beautiful Piper product is good for more than just passengers.

Well, we bought the OSH trailer (where we keep all of our myriad camping gear) with this day in mind.

I have spoken with the builder. Many of my fears have been laid to rest by the fact that this man's homebuilding credentials are impeccable. In fact, he has built some of the most well-known homebuilts at Oshkosh. If the deal goes through (or falters) I will identify him. You will recognize his work, guaranteed.
 
Well, we bought the OSH trailer (where we keep all of our myriad camping gear) with this day in mind.

I have spoken with the builder. Many of my fears have been laid to rest by the fact that this man's homebuilding credentials are impeccable. In fact, he has built some of the most well-known homebuilts at Oshkosh. If the deal goes through (or falters) I will identify him. You will recognize his work, guaranteed.

It is amazing what facts will do. ;)
 
I haven't personally seen any workmanship horror stories with RV's, but I have seen hidden butcher jobs in other makes. People with $ signs in their eyes have been known to sell airplanes with some pretty bad problems.

I have bought and sold, and been involved with building over a dozen RV's. I've traveled to 46 of the lower 48 states in RVs. Never had a problem. I am an EAA tech counselor and would be glad to take a look the 8a for you.
 
I flew one guys 8 down in Aus, it was pretty slick, good control harmony. I think he had a modified 325hp AEIO540 in it and it had a pretty impressive up line to my very novice experience. Not sure I would tear into negative Gs the way I did in the Extra 300, but I'm getting too old for that abuse anyway lol. It's a nice plane to fly. I'm not sure I would spend the extra money on an 8 over hot rodding a 4 though. Yeah, it's bigger, but I don't need bigger in a sport plane. I used to commute to work in a Midget Mustang, a 4 is luxurious lol.
 
An architect (or maybe builder) from somewhere in TX parks his -8 at Million Air from time to time. It's a pretty plane, and I when wandered over to admire it I noticed a big set of plans (nicely secured) and a small bag in the back. When I asked about room he grinned and said it was perfect for his travel--as long as he was only working on one job at a time.

I've had a tandem tail-dragger for 30 years and feel the same way, but mine isn't fast enough to fly anywhere other than to breakfast. Even though the tandems are prettier I'd probably end up with another side-by-side. I like to see and talk to whoever is in the airplane, and usually ask them to hold something.

Jay, I started another thread on the very same topic. I thought the one you had set up really had some life left in it. I'll repeat what I said there, most builders keep logs. I wouldn't purchase an Ex/Ab airframe without one. The EAA has the technical counselor program. You might be able to get a Technical Counselor familiar with the breed to look over your prospective aircraft and it's logs. Might ease your mind to a considerable extent.

The other thing I mentioned and will repeat is there really isn't that much room for luggage in an RV, at least not that I can see. If you expect to take your lovely spouse and saunter off for a week somewhere, you'll likely be shipping your bags. With what Mrs. Steingar packs, I know I would. The back seat of your beautiful Piper product is good for more than just passengers.
 
Even though the tandems are prettier I'd probably end up with another side-by-side. I like to see and talk to whoever is in the airplane, and usually ask them to hold something.

Side by side is great. If you're solo, you can put your lunch over there, spread out the maps, etc. When you're carrying a passenger, a front seat passenger can be much more helpful than someone in the back...
 
Side by side is great. If you're solo, you can put your lunch over there, spread out the maps, etc. When you're carrying a passenger, a front seat passenger can be much more helpful than someone in the back...

Gotta agree, after starting out in a Citabria and moving to a side by side Gobosh, that second front seat's great on cross countries. Besides, easier to tell how the flight's going when I can see how nervous my instructor looks :lol: Love the RV-8, but my favorite's still the -6 for the side by side seating.
 
Side by side is great. If you're solo, you can put your lunch over there, spread out the maps, etc. When you're carrying a passenger, a front seat passenger can be much more helpful than someone in the back...

Right, but if you want the greatest performance at least cost solo, the tandem provides the better choice. The correct choice should be weighted toward majority usage. Also consider that if the Steingar's are realistically going to require more space than the RV has to offer then it's irrelevant since they'll take the larger plane for trips. In this case it's all moot anyway since he is looking at a -6 that he knows. We deal the deals presented to us.
 
At the end of the day (or trip) aircraft speed is only one of many factors, and often well down the list-or should be. Jay isn't going to see nearly as much difference in trip times as he probably thinks, but he can take comfort that he's not alone. Almost everybody who ever stepped up to a faster airplane has learned the same lesson, and most have done so after the fact.

Most of the "and don't forget the trips to Iowa" in Jay's example are infrequent at best and the total time saved by flying a faster airplane a few times per year is less than watching Brave Heart or some documentary or fund-raiser on PBS. Ditto all the fuel burn arithmetic. It simply ain't gonna matter, especially when measured against the pocketbook whup-out required to make it happen.

But if a guy has money burning his pocket and just wants to fly something slicker and quicker, then none of that stuff matters and he should go for it. The girls probably won't notice but if he can make himself believe he needed the new plane he can probably he can probably pull off the rest of the great delusion.

And how many here know of pilots who bought airplanes because they wanted to go 180 but end up flying 165 instead because of the extra fuel burn/cost required to go faster? And lest anybody think this behavior pattern is limited to small GA, I have reams of trip performance information on turboprops and jets that demonstrate the exact same behavior but with more commas and zeros.

Right, but if you want the greatest performance at least cost solo, the tandem provides the better choice. The correct choice should be weighted toward majority usage. Also consider that if the Steingar's are realistically going to require more space than the RV has to offer then it's irrelevant since they'll take the larger plane for trips. In this case it's all moot anyway since he is looking at a -6 that he knows. We deal the deals presented to us.
 
I've flown the -4, -6, -6A, -7A, -8, and -9A. They're all wonderful flying machines. For fun, solo flying, the tandem is my favorite, but for traveling with spouse the side-by-side is preferred....at least by my spouse. But it's a highly personal decision.

Good luck with the decision-making process!
 
I have bought and sold, and been involved with building over a dozen RV's. I've traveled to 46 of the lower 48 states in RVs. Never had a problem. I am an EAA tech counselor and would be glad to take a look the 8a for you.

PM me if you're serious about that. I will be needing an RV expert, for sure.

It's funny how my 19 years as a pilot, 15 years as a multiple aircraft owner, and lifetime as an aviation enthusiast doesn't mean diddly-squat with regard to this deal. Even though I've belonged to EAA for 29 years, I am a complete newbie WRT homebuilts.
 
I've flown the -4, -6, -6A, -7A, -8, and -9A. They're all wonderful flying machines. For fun, solo flying, the tandem is my favorite, but for traveling with spouse the side-by-side is preferred....at least by my spouse. But it's a highly personal decision.

Good luck with the decision-making process!

Any advice on insurance?
 
Any advice on insurance?

I don't have specific numbers but none of the friends who have them have had any problem insuring them and none have complained about cost. But I will ask around. Geico will have some numbers I am sure.
 
Here's my trip report from this weekend.

The mission...hop down to Utah for Easter weekend with the daughter and grandkids.
The weather window looks favorable, Aurora hasn't been out of state since last September and needs the work. Beautiful day to go flying.
30b0a425c9cf408648cee25d5c5e6be7_zps26d17cf8.jpg


Ennis lake from 9500'
3ea872b44570377ad931ce94524cc6d4_zps8135434e.jpg


Big Sky Ski Resort is somewhere under there
47dfe3f87817bff7104fddd749241a59_zps466143f8.jpg


Ended up at 13500 for a few miles to stay out of the clouds. Smooth as silk and tailwind to boot.
6347c38d13a3008ed1440a84b89ab0bd_zps1610cea0.jpg


Back down to 11500 near Red Rocks wildlife area.
e0b4ecc9a7c35092f6ce60e9c505966f_zps37cb5e23.jpg


East of Logan Utah we picked up a few bumps, but overall a nice 2hr ride into Heber 36U
ba5fc103dd9ee558ca5d933e2b032ca7_zps37c33ef3.jpg
 
Last edited:
What a great thing these RV's are. On the way home, I had to pinch Kris to ensure it was real. We built a dream machine in our shop. 2 days off and the closest grandkids were 14hr RT drive away, but only 4.5 RT with Aurora carrying us. Dreams of Joy!

The return weather was ideal, so we delayed as long as possible for the return. I don't fly at night, so that was our limit.
We did most a good portion of the flight at 12500 to beat the bumps, but had some headwinds. Finally once back in the Madison valley I dropped down. Had some good numbers at this power setting. 24mpg at 183kts...I'll take it.
cae755d2abfde5fc087bcab520df2eb4_zpsbb21d79b.jpg


Next time, if we aren't racing the setting sun, we will detour over to get some good shots of Grand Teton.
806fec81062ce3b41d63326a02b1586a_zps005a2e2f.jpg


Yellowstone off in the distance. Island Park off the wingtip. Still snowmobiling around here.
7429a83f9d6545ef881d16d9c3bab158_zpsb9eaaedc.jpg


Sphinx Mtn just southeast of Ennis MT
abdeedde48f06dec2975a0fd14a515ae_zps8914a192.jpg


Back to the grind tomorrow. Toston Dam is barely visible at the upper bend in the river.
ca8b9b735329a3cd3e72fd6242282b77_zps603cdff2.jpg


Good to be home after a excellent Easter weekend with the youngsters.
cebb59d5c6bc9d61916271e2ed80b3e5_zps2055e7c5.jpg


Insurance....$80k hull for a 400hr pilot with 250tailwheel hrs and 150hrs in make/model was $1600 for me.
 
Last edited:
Here is what the Grand Tetons look like from my front yard...:yes:
 

Attachments

  • front yard.jpg
    front yard.jpg
    2.2 MB · Views: 20
My wife said "NO CUBS, NO CHAMPS, NOT EVEN S-7" (she forgot to account for RV-8 and LongEZ). However, if Mary is ok with it, then RV-8A should be fine. I know a gentleman at SportPilotTalk who flew with his wife from Tennessee to Arizona in Sky Arrow. Stranger things happened.
 
The insurance quote is steeper than mine was for my 182 when I had similar time in type for reference.

Not a whole hell of a lot though and the lack of a training wheel is likely a factor
 
Back
Top