RV capabilities

Let'sgoflying!

Let'sgoflying!

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
20,771
Location
west Texas
Display Name
Display name:
Dave Taylor
Which models are generally recognized as best at long XC, ‘IFR-comfortable’?
10,
9A
?
 
Yes.
9. It’s wing is longer and narrower - made for x country, can get into the teens
10
14

7 is more acrobatic but can do x country

But you should study up on the Vans website -
 
Last edited:
We had a 9a. The gear led towers dug into the calves. In gusty winds it was tough to maintain control; think kite in a hurricane.
 
FORANE said:
We had a 9a. The gear led towers dug into the calves. In gusty winds it was tough to maintain control; think kite in a hurricane.
Click to expand...
Wow. Never heard of that. Assume that’s why you used to have it?

You might also check out Vans AirForce web site.
 
WDD said:
Wow. Never heard of that. Assume that’s why you used to have it?

You might also check out Vans AirForce web site.
Click to expand...
Never heard of the gear towers? Those were uncomfortable on longer trips. The wing generated alot of lift at slow speeds which made for short takeoff and landings as well as easy climbs. The downside was in gusty winds the plane would get tossed around alot, and when landing in gusty winds I was afraid I was going to bend the plane. I had the Lancair at the same time as the RV. The Lancair would just cut through the gusts that would make the RV almost uncontrollable.

I've been on VAF.
 
Ok I'm biased because I built and fly a 10. IMO it's the best RV for the X/C mission--Cabin size, payload, power, and speed, albeit at a cost The 9 is good if you only need 2 seats, a bit of baggage, and don't mind flying a little slower. It's a 7 with a Roncz airfoil wing giving it great cruise performance on lower HP than a 7. IMO if money was no object and I only needed 2 seats, I go with a 14 over a 9-- it has a bigger cabin, is a little faster, is a great performer (it uses a shorter version of the RV10 wing) and can do "gentleman" aerobatics when you feel like doing a little yanking and banking.
 
I know RV’s have a fairly large and loyal fan base. This is the first time I have read informed and objective reviews. Thank you for that!

I followed (via Pilot Workshops) Keith Smith from New Jersey to California and back flying his Lancair. Very impressive!
 
Be great if the factory sold them as kits, or completed, with the latest and greatest panels as an option.

Some people don't want to build a plane, and are concerned about the construction by some random person in their garage.
 
Whitney said:
Be great if the factory sold them as kits, or completed, with the latest and greatest panels as an option.

Some people don't want to build a plane, and are concerned about the construction by some random person in their garage.
Click to expand...
@Jesse Saint offers a rapid builders assist option I believe.
 
Whitney said:
Be great if the factory sold them as kits, or completed, with the latest and greatest panels as an option.

Some people don't want to build a plane, and are concerned about the construction by some random person in their garage.
Click to expand...

The completed versions would then cost more than what the market would be willing to pay. Sorry, but you can't have your cake and eat it too. At least the construction is very straight forward so any A&P worth his/her salt could do a pre-buy on an RV and tell you if it's sound or a lawn ornament.
 
You can get a factory build RV12 as an S-LSA
 
Lot of good used RVs for sale. Tsts4 is right about a good pre buy can help sort out a good one. Besides - as fanatical as these rv people seem to be I doubt one would be built that was seriously flawed. Bonus - you get to buy the same Garmin panel products that are in certified aircraft for a fraction of the cost . Heck - you can even install yourself.
 
TomF said:
You can get a factory build RV12 as an S-LSA
Click to expand...

Sure you can get one built from Van's ($125K -$160K for the fly-away S-LSA vs $85K-$100K for the full kit). However, no matter the version ( S-SLA, E-LSA, or E-AB), the 12, while a nice airplane, ain't a great X/C machine compared to its RV brethren.
 
Whitney said:
An extra $100,000 for factory built would be great with some people.
Click to expand...

That wouldn't be the case for the non-S-LSA RV's. The RV-12 was designed under ATSM standards as an S-LSA from the get go, so going from S-LSA flying version to E-LSA/E-AB kit was easy. The other RVs would have to be redesigned to meet current certification standards and then type certified. Sooooo, that plus ramping up production from zero and the price bump wouldn't be anywhere close to $100K.
 
Whitney said:
Be great if the factory sold them as kits, or completed, with the latest and greatest panels as an option.

Some people don't want to build a plane, and are concerned about the construction by some random person in their garage.
Click to expand...
Several companies do that already, and completely above board. Y'know, names like Cessna, Cirrus, Piper, Maule...

Nauga,
some random person with a garage
 
I fly an -8A. BLUF it’s a small sport car - fast and maneuverable but cramped and hot inside.

The 8 is a great performer - speedy and nimble, climbs like a homesick angel - instantaneously responsive to control inputs but not twitchy - it won’t do anything you didn’t tell it to do . All you need is one fingertip and your thumb tip. If you can fly a Cessna or Piper, you can fly an RV with little adjustment. Despite the high cruise speed (150-170 knots true depending on altitude and power setting - I’m usually down below four grand), I’m at 62-65 on short final.

Maintenance is about the same as a 172 or Cherokee, but can be dependent on the build quality, especially with the electrical system and avionics. There are more than 11,000 RVs out there, with a very helpful and knowledgeable community.

Downsides: The back seat in an -8 is tight. The passenger’s feet are alongside the pilot’s thighs and they’re looking at the back of his head about a foot from their face. If passenger comfort or interaction is important, then a tandem is probably not right for you.

I’m actually probably going to sell pretty soon and move back to four seater - side-by-side and more capacity is now what we need.

It gets roasting hot under the canopy. A lot of RVs have a fabric sunshade, which helps, but it’s still hotter than a roof.

Go for a ride with someone local in their RV and see what you think.
 
Best RVs For Sale sites?
Have tried TAP, Bstormers, VAF.
Only found two RV-10s.
 
Let'sgoflying! said:
I have not heard any pireps on this engine; do you have one?
Click to expand...

I trust @mondster’s input which was that you are at the mercy of Lycoming for if/when they decide to do a run of cylinders as aftermarket for that motor does not exist.
 
TCABM said:
If I wasn’t settled on a -10, I’d do an -8 over a -14 just because of the 360 instead of a 390 motor.
Click to expand...

Tandem doesn’t work for us so that’s why I didn’t mention the 8. That and there’s really no performance improvement over the other models, especially for X/Cs.
 
ateamer said:
Downsides: The back seat in an -8 is tight. The passenger’s feet are alongside the pilot’s thighs and they’re looking at the back of his head about a foot from their face. If passenger comfort or interaction is important, then a tandem is probably not right for you.
Click to expand...

Funny I thought the back of an -8 was about the roomiest most comfy rear pit of anything I've been in...as tandems go, and I'm well over 6 ft. tall. I'd much rather ride around back there than smushed shoulder-to-shoulder in an RV-6/7/9.
 
Loved my RV6 for any trip under 2 1/2 hours. Seat was comfortable, enough room for my wife and myself, and economical. However no matter how we readjusted our seating position to relieve the sore spots that eventually developed, one would always wind up in the same position. I always thought a seat that could be repositioned in flight like in a Cessna, Beech, Piper, would of helped immensely especially as one gets older.
 
FORANE said:
Never heard of the gear towers? Those were uncomfortable on longer trips. The wing generated alot of lift at slow speeds which made for short takeoff and landings as well as easy climbs. The downside was in gusty winds the plane would get tossed around alot, and when landing in gusty winds I was afraid I was going to bend the plane. I had the Lancair at the same time as the RV. The Lancair would just cut through the gusts that would make the RV almost uncontrollable.

I've been on VAF.
Click to expand...

I own a 9 and don’t know about this gear tower issue. I have 600 hours on my bird and it’s great for cross county trips. I’ve flown it 8 hours in one day with good comfort. The 9 does have extremely light wing loading but I’ve never found it uncontrollable at all. It flies like any RV. Very responsive and it only takes two fingers on the stick. It’ll fly high and get great mileage if you need it to. That’s the main advantage it has over the 14.
b79ee992d13f59bc6444e6896c816cbb.jpg

I took this pic in the way from Napa to San Diego the other day. I was at 15k doing 150 knots true. 6.1 gallons an hour.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
Peter Anderson said:
I own a 9 and don’t know about this gear tower issue. I have 600 hours on my bird and it’s great for cross county trips. I’ve flown it 8 hours in one day with good comfort. The 9 does have extremely light wing loading but I’ve never found it uncontrollable at all. It flies like any RV. Very responsive and it only takes two fingers on the stick. It’ll fly high and get great mileage if you need it to. That’s the main advantage it has over the 14.
b79ee992d13f59bc6444e6896c816cbb.jpg

I took this pic in the way from Napa to San Diego the other day. I was at 15k doing 150 knots true. 6.1 gallons an hour.
Click to expand...
Don't know about the gear tower issue? Really? cmon man.
It's an efficient plane. It has alot to offer. No plane is perfect though.
 
I believe the tower issue is only on the 9a not the 9.
 
If you have short legs I can see your calf touching the 7A/9A tower. I never even noticed it when I once flew a 7A.

upload_2022-6-8_8-44-17.png
 
Been flying an RV7A for several years. The 7A gear towers are no issue (am 6'0"). Windy here in West Texas did notice that I could land my previous Tiger in a direct cross wind under 33 knots ... the RV7A runs out of rudder at 23-25 knots on direct cross wind. Tail is supposed to be the same as the Tiger, so am guessing it might be a weight issue. Most of my flying is solo and light luggage, so am no where near max weight.
 
FORANE said:
Don't know about the gear tower issue? Really? cmon man.
It's an efficient plane. It has alot to offer. No plane is perfect though.
Click to expand...

It is a 9A. And yep. Never heard of the issue. Nor has anyone ever complained about it while riding in my plane. I’ve had short people all the way to my dad who is 6’5. My interior covers up those gear towers. You can’t even see them. No plane is perfect. I never stated that it was though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
No gear tower issue on the 10--they are under the front seats :D
 
Is the majority of your flying time solo? 9/9a. If two or more cross country, the 10. For either, post a 'Want to Buy' on VAF, and network a bit to find a plane before it hits the market. It is still a seller's market, IMO, so be ready to pay more than you would think.

I have tens of hours in most models, and hundreds in a few. I only ever really notice gear tower issues in the 6a. There are minor ergonomic issues for all the Van's at times, but they can be dealt with, and the benefits are too plentiful to ignore.
 
I admire the Vans fleet - impressive performance. I probably will never own one because at my age I need a more sit up straight and easy to get in and out. More so for my wife.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top