Talk me out of building a Van's RV

unsafervguy said:
coming from someone that flys an egg....... :)
Click to expand...

If there was ever an example of trading labor hours for better lines it would be the Questair Venture. Very few are built in less than 6,000 hours. 30 years later there are still kits that aren’t done lol.
 
iamtheari said:
So the basic airframe and powerplant are $60,155 for the RV-7 and $75,375 for the RV-14. That seems like quite a price bump for unspecified gains.
Click to expand...
I think the main gain of RV-14 is the cockpit size. I simply cannot fit into most builds of RV-4. I found one into I can kinda worm in, but it's clear that my headphones would scratch the canopy. In RV-6, I fit pretty snugly. I haven't tried RV-14, but Van's literature claims improvements for tall pilots. BTW, I know a guy who built an RV-14 in less than 2 years. In fact he had it mostly together in under 9 monts, but then it took him a while to taxi. He's already had an RV-4 built and his wife told me that sometimes when they travel, they send their luggage by mail. I guess RV-14 was supposed to address that little problem.
 
Grum.Man said:
If there was ever an example of trading labor hours for better lines it would be the Questair Venture. Very few are built in less than 6,000 hours. 30 years later there are still kits that aren’t done lol.
Click to expand...

One of our hangar neighbors is building one. He’s at around a little over ten years. But he’s also a heart surgeon so he’s kinda busy. :)
 
This should do it. See what an RV does to you? It brought down the Reich.
 
It sounds like I need a test sit (and possibly flight) in the RV-7 and the RV-14 to be able to decide between them. I guess I’ll bite the first small bullet and create an account at the Van’s forums to start begging.
 
One last thing about slider vs. tip-up...the tip-ups can have issues with rainwater getting in the avionics bay/rudder pedals area, due to the location of the forward cutline. You can reduce/eliminate this with careful weather sealing, etc. The upside is it's much easier to access the back of the panel.

The sliders have a continuous aluminum sheet over the IP, to which the windscreen is bonded, so everything stays nice and dry. The downside is that you need to do a "panel dive" to access things from underneath. An alternative is removing the EFIS screen for access to other components, which gives you a pretty big hole to work through.

I'm not familiar with the -14 tip-up. Being a newer design, I'd bet the waterproofing issue has been better addressed. Maybe a -14 owner can chime in.

Ari, I wish you lived closer. I'd be really happy to give you a ride!
 
SoCal RV Flyer said:
One last thing about slider vs. tip-up...the tip-ups can have issues with rainwater getting in the avionics bay/rudder pedals area, due to the location of the forward cutline. You can reduce/eliminate this with careful weather sealing, etc. The upside is it's much easier to access the back of the panel.

The sliders have a continuous aluminum sheet over the IP, to which the windscreen is bonded, so everything stays nice and dry. The downside is that you need to do a "panel dive" to access things from underneath. An alternative is removing the EFIS screen for access to other components, which gives you a pretty big hole to work through.

I'm not familiar with the -14 tip-up. Being a newer design, I'd bet the waterproofing issue has been better addressed. Maybe a -14 owner can chime in.

Ari, I wish you lived closer. I'd be really happy to give you a ride!
Click to expand...
It seems like the 14 is not nearly as well supported yet. No firewall forward kit is listed on Van’s website for example. I’m sure that’s just a function of it being so new, and by the time I’m ready to hang the engine it will be more of a proven science.

I think that the slider does make more sense for me. As a traveling airplane, a small loss in visibility is probably worth the trade for less worry about weather on the ground (rain in the instrument panel and wind blowing the tip-up canopy away).
 
CC268 said:
My hangar neighbor is building an RV14. Every time I walk over there I am reminded that there is no way I could ever build an RV.
Click to expand...

I'll bet you could.

I used to think the same thing, no way I could do it, so maybe I'll buy a Citabria instead... but, I'd helped a buddy build an RV-6 tail, was kinda familiar with basic metal work. Then, Oshkosh 2003; I see hundreds of RVs parked in the grass... then I see the RV-8 quick build kit on display at the Vans tent. Hmm. Next step was the pilgrimage to Vans HQ near Portland for the "free" demo ride. That's it man, I was done. I ordered my RV-8 tail kit the next week, to be followed up with QB wings and fuselage kits. My project took just over 3 years; 2 1/2 years in my garage and 6 months in a hangar for final assembly. Prior to this I'd never really done any serious garage tinkering, not even to rebuild a lawn mower... but, I wanted an RV-8, bad. Couldn't afford to buy, so I built. You just gotta want it.

It was a great experience! Lots of work, but the payoff, holy crap... I've been flying it now for 11 years and 1455 hours and it still makes me giggle when I fly it. It's a taildragger (as it should be!), carbureted 180 hp with constant speed prop. It goes fairly fast, it goes slow; it's at home landing at a big Class B airport or on an itty bitty grass strip. It's inexpensive to fly and maintain; 165+ KTAS on 8-9 gph. My wife even likes traveling in it! My day job is airline pilot, free travel and all that, but the reality is, airline pass travel sucks. My wife actually prefers going in the RV.

Once you get a ride, you'll be hooked!
 
SoCal RV Flyer said:
One last thing about slider vs. tip-up...
Click to expand...
...side hinged. :D
The one off-stock mod I wish I had done on my -4 was a slider. I'd take the loss in field of view (visibility is for weather!!!!) for a safer canopy jettison. It would've added years to my build, I'm sure. :rolleyes:

Nauga,
and the 'duck, shuck and huck'
 
The adult members in my EAA chapter are building an RV-12. It has been under construction for almost two years. Currently working on then finishIng kit. Avionics and engine kits are all that will be left. To date it has been done totally through donations.
 
jbDC9 said:
I'll bet you could.

I used to think the same thing, no way I could do it, so maybe I'll buy a Citabria instead... but, I'd helped a buddy build an RV-6 tail, was kinda familiar with basic metal work. Then, Oshkosh 2003; I see hundreds of RVs parked in the grass... then I see the RV-8 quick build kit on display at the Vans tent. Hmm. Next step was the pilgrimage to Vans HQ near Portland for the "free" demo ride. That's it man, I was done. I ordered my RV-8 tail kit the next week, to be followed up with QB wings and fuselage kits. My project took just over 3 years; 2 1/2 years in my garage and 6 months in a hangar for final assembly. Prior to this I'd never really done any serious garage tinkering, not even to rebuild a lawn mower... but, I wanted an RV-8, bad. Couldn't afford to buy, so I built. You just gotta want it.

It was a great experience! Lots of work, but the payoff, holy crap... I've been flying it now for 11 years and 1455 hours and it still makes me giggle when I fly it. It's a taildragger (as it should be!), carbureted 180 hp with constant speed prop. It goes fairly fast, it goes slow; it's at home landing at a big Class B airport or on an itty bitty grass strip. It's inexpensive to fly and maintain; 165+ KTAS on 8-9 gph. My wife even likes traveling in it! My day job is airline pilot, free travel and all that, but the reality is, airline pass travel sucks. My wife actually prefers going in the RV.

Once you get a ride, you'll be hooked!
Click to expand...

I grew up racing motocross and working on bikes...I am fairly mechanical, but a lot of the stuff on the Vans is kind of over my head. I just don’t know that I’d have the patience for it. I have virtually no fabrication experience either. My neighbor spent weeks on just the damn canopy alone. Seeing the work it took to fiberglass the front of it was a lot of work and patience. It just seems like a pain staking process. I just wouldn’t have the patience for it. He is also divorced and has mostly grown kids so he spends a ton of time out there. Idk how people would build one if they were married and have kids and unless you took 10 years to build it. I think there would be portions that would be fun but I feel like a lot of it would be tedious and lengthy. I’d love a Vans but if I bought one I would buy one already built or have a reputable builder build me one (or better yet buy it already built - choose paint and panel).
 
SoCal RV Flyer said:
One last thing about slider vs. tip-up...the tip-ups can have issues with rainwater getting in the avionics bay/rudder pedals area, due to the location of the forward cutline. You can reduce/eliminate this with careful weather sealing, etc. The upside is it's much easier to access the back of the panel.
Click to expand...

The joke goes, Tipper or Slider? Where do you want your leaks?
 
It's a bit daunting when you unpack all the kit parts and hardware, and think about what lies ahead. But as everyone on VAF says, "One bite of the elephant at a time." It helps so much to build it in your garage (if possible) so you have easy access and can do a little bit every day. I went the Quik Build route myself, and it took about 1300 hours over 19 months, then another 4 months of final assembly in the hangar. That last phase was slower, as I'd go to the hangar (an hour's drive) maybe two or three times a week.

You gotta love learning new skills. I bought the Van's toolbox practice kit and absolutely destroyed it with my early riveting attempts. Not to be deterred, I cut that mangled box into a bunch of aluminum strips, and drilled, deburred, dimpled, cleco'd and riveted those suckers together, over and over, until I liked what I saw.

Really, you don't have to fabricate too much. On the -9, it's mostly a case of making smaller parts and brackets from aluminum angle stock. The -14 is said to be easier, with better instructions.

Anybody with reasonable mechanical aptitude who likes working with his hands can build one. For me, the key was to bounce around a little in the construction process. When I was frustrated with bending the canopy bows, I'd shift gears and assemble the bellcrank for the elevator pushrod, or something. And then I'd go to others' build logs and see how they'd approached what I'd had a problem with. Some incredible support there.

Fiberglass work just plain sucks (the intersection fairings between the wheel pants and the gear fairings in particular). But I'm pretty good at it now! :)

What was it that JFK said at Rice University? We do these things not because they are easy, but because they are hard. I think just staying with the project was the hardest, but when I took it on I had absolutely no doubt that I'd finish with a flying airplane. Eyes on the prize, baby! :D
 
Last edited:
SoCal RV Flyer said:
Really, you don't have to fabricate too much.
Click to expand...
Newbie :rolleyes::D
In dark times before pre-punched and quick-builds were available...with the exception of the spar, I drilled every hole in my RV. I heard the 'one bite of the elephant at a time" too, but I also heard, "There are 12,000 rivets in an RV. For every rivet there are at least two holes to drill. For every hole there are two sides to debur..." I just had my first exposure to a pre-punched part (replacement aileron, damaged in transport) and it is a thing of wonder. And you guys get assembly instructions! :D

SoCal RV Flyer said:
Fiberglass work just plain sucks (the intersection fairings between the wheel pants and the gear fairings in particular).
Click to expand...
I had done a lot of glasswork before (and since) on other projects, that's one reason I chose a metal airplane. There sure is a crap-ton of fiberglass work in an all-metal airplane! :)

Nauga,
who has no regrets
 
My build experience and decision tree mirrors most of what has already been said by SoCal, unsafervguy and kyleb. I have ~5 years and 2000-ish manhours of build time in my non-quickbuild 9A (tipup, IO320, FP prop), first flight in 2012. Sure, the composite planes look awesome, but I enjoy the build tasks of working with metal or wood more than fiberglass. And as a first-time builder, I appreciated the community of other builders I could turn to if needed for help -- there were at one point 5 RV's of various models on my airport, and dozens of flying examples within 100 miles. Plus the online resources, too. Even if I didn't end up using all those resources, knowing they were available gave me confidence in starting the build, knowing I'd be able to find help to work through any problems if needed.

Just finished my 4th condition inspection with ~300 hours TTAF; should/would be more but I didn't fly a year+ while we built a house. The entire build log is online for anyone interested.

If you decide you're interested in a 9, I'd be happy to give you some stick time; I'm slammed with work nonstop for the next few weeks unfortunately -- it's that time of year -- but after Dec 15 I open up quite a bit until March. I'm on the SE edge of the MSP area. Of course there are plenty of other RV's around MSP if you ask on VAF or mnwing.org
 
nauga said:
Newbie :rolleyes::D
In dark times before pre-punched and quick-builds were available...with the exception of the spar, I drilled every hole in my RV. I heard the 'one bite of the elephant at a time" too, but I also heard, "There are 12,000 rivets in an RV. For every rivet there are at least two holes to drill. For every hole there are two sides to debur..." I just had my first exposure to a pre-punched part (replacement aileron, damaged in transport) and it is a thing of wonder. And you guys get assembly instructions! :D


Nauga,
who has no regrets
Click to expand...

The difference between my non-prepunched RV-6 kit and my pre-punched RV-10 kit is night and day. The -10 is largely "tab A into slot B", where it takes a lot of work to screw something up. Of course, you still have to final drill, deburr, countersink (or dimple) the parts, but it is much easier. The only parts where there is still a lot of cut, fit, trim, fit, trim, fit... work is the fiberglass, which is still a lot of work. Also, Vans sells FWF kits (and instructions) for the newer designs , which eliminates most of the head scratching on that part of the build.

The RV-12 and RV-14 are even more developed than the RV-10, and should go together even easier.
 
kyleb said:
The difference between my non-prepunched RV-6 kit and my pre-punched RV-10 kit is night and day. The -10 is largely "tab A into slot B",
Click to expand...

My understanding (being a buyer, not a builder) is that this is the biggest difference between the RV-6 and RV-7 kits. And partly why the 6 is no longer marketed.

The other difference discussed is the Vertical Stabilizer which is taller on the 7. Some put the 7 Stab on their 6.
 
nauga said:
Newbie :rolleyes::D
In dark times before pre-punched and quick-builds were available...with the exception of the spar, I drilled every hole in my RV. I heard the 'one bite of the elephant at a time" too, but I also heard, "There are 12,000 rivets in an RV. For every rivet there are at least two holes to drill. For every hole there are two sides to debur..." I just had my first exposure to a pre-punched part (replacement aileron, damaged in transport) and it is a thing of wonder. And you guys get assembly instructions! :D
Click to expand...

Yeah, even the -9 is light-years ahead of the non-pre-punched kits. I think that about 1/3 of the total build time is de-burring all the aluminum!! Feels really good when you take all the sharp edges off a big stack of parts, after hours of filing, and actually get to assemble them. :)

Photos of other people's builds really help reduce the head-scratching when the instructions alone aren't enough.

Because a picture is worth a thousand words...and better written!
 
My youth group at the chapter is building a BD-6 donated to us by Bede. It is definitely not the same as a Van's kit. We get to fabricate a lot of parts and work things out. It is good learning for the youth.
 
jbDC9 said:
My wife even likes traveling in it!
Click to expand...
You have an RV-8, the tandem seating one, right? I wouldn’t be telling the world that your wife actually likes traveling in a tandem seating home built tiny little aerobatic airplane. Someone will steal her away, and probably take your plane too!
 
Velocity173 said:
Fights on! RV vs Glasair.
Click to expand...

Not even close to a fair fight. The Glasair loses out in both rate and radius. Now an RV-4 vs. an RV-6A is interesting - the RV-4 has a better radius but the RV-6A matches the -4's rate while having a better power loading for increased acceleration and better vertical performance. It's a classic angles vs. energy match up.

 
Last edited:
Ravioli said:
My understanding (being a buyer, not a builder) is that this is the biggest difference between the RV-6 and RV-7 kits. And partly why the 6 is no longer marketed.

The other difference discussed is the Vertical Stabilizer which is taller on the 7. Some put the 7 Stab on their 6.
Click to expand...

The last year or two of RV-6 kits actually used the RV-8 vertical stabilizer and rudder. The -7s originally used the -8 vertical and rudder as well, until Vans decided they needed the -9's fin and rudder for spin recovery reasons.
 
ChiefPilot said:
Not even close to a fair fight. The Glasair loses out in both rate and radius. Now an RV-4 vs. an RV-6A is interesting - the RV-4 has a better radius but the RV-6A matches the -4's rate while having a better power loading for increased acceleration. It's a classic angles vs. energy match up.

Click to expand...

A Glasair with an AOA indicator will take an RV without one any day of the week.

Would never get that close anyway. The RV-4 would show up on the Glasair's radar like a barn door while the Glasair's signature is about the size of a bird. He'd call "Fox three" before the RV-4 ever knew what hit 'em.
 
Velocity173 said:
A Glasair with an AOA indicator will take an RV without one any day of the week.
Would never get that close anyway. The RV-4 would show up on the Glasair's radar like a barn door while the Glasair's signature is about the size of a bird. He'd call "Fox three" before the RV-4 ever knew what hit 'em.
Click to expand...

Nah, while the AoA is nice, the RV pilot who knows his aircraft can ride it around on the boulders just fine. No way a Glasair I, II, or III smokes an RV-4/6 in a WVR, guns only fight. You have a point about BVR though - the RV-6A I fly isn't equipped with AMRAAMs.
 
ChiefPilot said:
Nah, while the AoA is nice, the RV pilot who knows his aircraft can ride it around on the boulders just fine. No way a Glasair I, II, or III smokes an RV-4/6 in a WVR, guns only fight. You have a point about BVR though - the RV-6A I fly isn't equipped with AMRAAMs.
Click to expand...
At 330 lbs per missile, neither of those planes is going to be hauling around much of a BVR loadout. The turning fight is the only one that matters.
 
In comparing the different models, don’t forget that the -3, -4, -6/6A’s required jigs to build the empennage, wings and fuselage. Subsequent models don’t. All you need is a frick’n set of saw horses.

Kids these days....
 
ChiefPilot said:
Not even close to a fair fight. The Glasair loses out in both rate and radius. Now an RV-4 vs. an RV-6A is interesting - the RV-4 has a better radius but the RV-6A matches the -4's rate while having a better power loading for increased acceleration and better vertical performance. It's a classic angles vs. energy match up.
Click to expand...

4's and 6's are spec'd for the same engines. The -4 is lighter, has less drag, and more wing. It should win against a -6 with an equal pilot. RV vs Glasair is Zero vs Mustang. The faster airplane can generally choose the terms of the encounter and win by maximizing the benefits of the speed advantage.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top