Vans RV-10?

S

shyampatel94

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Aug 12, 2013
Messages
116
Display Name
Display name:
Shyam Patel
Hey guys, I know this is a kit plane but is their anyway they would build it for you and how much would it cost?
 
shyampatel94 said:
Hey guys, I know this is a kit plane but is their anyway they would build it for you and how much would it cost?
Click to expand...

No, they would not build it for you. However, Vans did just begin selling pre-built RV-12 LSAs, if that's something you want to look at. I hear that the -10 is a pretty sweet plane, but you're going to have to build it or find one for sale that has already been built, and they won't be cheap. To give you a ballpark figure, there's one on Barnstormers right now listed at $215k with 115 hours on it, and another for $189,000 with 500 hours. It's an efficient plane, but the IO-540 is still going to burn a lot of gas and cost a lot for overhaul if your mission, as you stated previously, is mostly just flying around the local area.
 
dukeblue219 said:
No, they would not build it for you. However, Vans did just begin selling pre-built RV-12 LSAs, if that's something you want to look at. I hear that the -10 is a pretty sweet plane, but you're going to have to build it or find one for sale that has already been built, and they won't be cheap. To give you a ballpark figure, there's one on Barnstormers right now listed at $215k with 115 hours on it, and another for $189,000 with 500 hours. It's an efficient plane, but the IO-540 is still going to burn a lot of gas and cost a lot for overhaul if your mission, as you stated previously, is mostly just flying around the local area.
Click to expand...
Agreed.

It's not a "fly around the local area" plane. Definitely a family traveler, or as we call it, "2 people and all the shoes she wants to carry".

It is efficient with a big engine that is running easily in most operations. With LOP operations it's cheaper to fuel than my old 180hp Maule on a mpg basis. That would not necessarily apply to bopping around the patch though it can be flown fuel efficiently that way too, it's just that you have the wrong plane.

Bill "2 years, 340 hours and counting" Watson
 
Why would you want someone else to build a kit airplane? Part of the fun of kit aircraft is the time you spend building it!

My recommendation: Buy a certified aircraft if you aren't interested in building the kit.
 
Tarheel Pilot said:
Why would you want someone else to build a kit airplane? Part of the fun of kit aircraft is the time you spend building it!

My recommendation: Buy a certified aircraft if you aren't interested in building the kit.
Click to expand...

If a kit plane has the performance and handling you're looking for, but you don't have 2-9 years of time to build one yourself, why not buy one? I would.
 
To the OP- No one can legally build you an RV-10 including the factory. Their airworthiness certificate falls under the Experimental, Amateur Built category. As the name implies, it is to be built by amateurs, not working for compensation.

Having said that, there are serial builders that skirt this reg and you often see their planes up for sale in Trade a Plane. A "used" RV-10, with no paint, minimal interior, minimal avionics with the 40 hours flown off, will cost you well north of $200K. Closer to $300K. For that much money, an option would be to buy an A-36 Bonanza, fly it today and be happy.
 
Even if the same package (give or take) could be bought for half the money?

LDJones said:
If a kit plane has the performance and handling you're looking for, but you don't have 2-9 years of time to build one yourself, why not buy one? I would.
Click to expand...
 
And that is why I begrudgingly fly a certified Piper slo-rrow....By the time the kid or kids are out the house in 20 years the RV-7s may have depreciated enough to move into that market for the Mrs and I.
 
wabower said:
Even if the same package (give or take) could be bought for half the money?
Click to expand...

All factors would need to be considered. I wouldn't buy the experimental for the sake of it being experimental, but I would automatically opt off the certified, everything else being equal. But if the same performance and other intangibles are comparable, and the price is 50%, I'd probably go used certified.
 
Dav8or said:
To the OP- No one can legally build you an RV-10 including the factory. Their airworthiness certificate falls under the Experimental, Amateur Built category. As the name implies, it is to be built by amateurs, not working for compensation.

Having said that, there are serial builders that skirt this reg and you often see their planes up for sale in Trade a Plane. A "used" RV-10, with no paint, minimal interior, minimal avionics with the 40 hours flown off, will cost you well north of $200K. Closer to $300K. For that much money, an option would be to buy an A-36 Bonanza, fly it today and be happy.
Click to expand...

REALLY? A $300,000 RV-10? Let's get real here. A loaded glass panel RV-10 with leather interior can be found for $225,000 or less. I know several pilots that have paid less. To answer a couple other remarks in this thread, it's a true 4-up with bags and will get you 175 kt cruise with full fuel. Try that in a $700,000 Cirrus. Also, why buy instead of building an RV? You get to fly instead of spending a couple years building and you can still do anything you want to it as an owner.
 
If your going to buy a used RV 10 for $200K, just get a certified Cirrus instead.
 
You really think a few knots or a few pounds means jack squat in real life?

mrreddick said:
REALLY? A $300,000 RV-10? Let's get real here. A loaded glass panel RV-10 with leather interior can be found for $225,000 or less. I know several pilots that have paid less. To answer a couple other remarks in this thread, it's a true 4-up with bags and will get you 175 kt cruise with full fuel. Try that in a $700,000 Cirrus. Also, why buy instead of building an RV? You get to fly instead of spending a couple years building and you can still do anything you want to it as an owner.
Click to expand...
 
My IFR equipped bird EW= 1656. Gross= 2700. 1044-360 fuel= that leaves 684 for my family and baggage. Cruise at 160 ktas, 10.5 gph, LOP, 12500', 4.5 hrs max flight time for us. Is it worth $165-195K to build yourself? Great plane, but has its limitations like most. Good luck in your plane search.
 
mrreddick said:
To answer a couple other remarks in this thread, it's a true 4-up with bags and will get you 175 kt cruise with full fuel.
Click to expand...



RV10flyer said:
My IFR equipped bird EW= 1656. Gross= 2700. 1044-360 fuel= that leaves 684 for my family and baggage. Cruise at 160 ktas, 10.5 gph, LOP, 12500', 4.5 hrs max flight time for us. Is it worth $165-195K to build yourself? Great plane, but has its limitations like most. Good luck in your plane search.
Click to expand...

:dunno:

:popcorn:
 
RV10flyer said:
My IFR equipped bird EW= 1656. Gross= 2700. 1044-360 fuel= that leaves 684 for my family and baggage. Cruise at 160 ktas, 10.5 gph, LOP, 12500', 4.5 hrs max flight time for us. Is it worth $165-195K to build yourself? Great plane, but has its limitations like most. Good luck in your plane search.
Click to expand...

RotorAndWing said:
[/B]
:dunno:

:popcorn:
Click to expand...

I plan for 165 ktas in the -10 running ROP (afraid to get high enough to go LOP with the little kiddo in the plane). I'm guessing LOP would probably put you in the 155-160 ktas area mentioned above.

It's a great plane. Roomier and faster than the 182RG that we used to XC in, but my wife still likes the high-wing so she can see the ground below. :dunno:
 
CJones said:
I plan for 165 ktas in the -10 running ROP (afraid to get high enough to go LOP with the little kiddo in the plane). I'm guessing LOP would probably put you in the 155-160 ktas area mentioned above.

It's a great plane. Roomier and faster than the 182RG that we used to XC in, but my wife still likes the high-wing so she can see the ground below. :dunno:
Click to expand...
I plan for 155 LOP which for my setup seems to be the efficiency sweet spot but I can range from 152 to 160 LOP. Altitude is not a requirement, just injector tuning. I go LOP as soon as I start cruising.

When people ask me if I am happy with it, I'm compelled to tell them it's better than I ever could have hoped. The performance and simplicity of the design is the basis of my satisfaction. The robust electrical system and advanced avionics I put in it bring great joy. I enjoyed the build but enjoy flying something I built even more. Customizing it to meet my requirements is gratifying as well. Maintaining it is an engaging learning experience.

I guess I want to say that building and flying my '10 is a true luxury costing much time and money but also a life altering kind of achievement with great rewards.

Buying and flying a '10 is just an ownership option that personally, I doubt that I would have ever done even if it made good sense. If I didn't build it, I'd go certified. Of course, if and when I sell mine, I'd recommend buying one.

Bill "just filled the O2 tank and ready for some long, high legs" Watson
 
I've got an O-540 in my Cherokee 235...can carry 1000 lbs of butts and bags with full (84) gallons, lean her out high and she'll burn 11/hr at 130 knots true. All for less than $60k.

RV what? :)
 
shyampatel94 said:
Hey guys, I know this is a kit plane but is their anyway they would build it for you and how much would it cost?
Click to expand...

You can buy a quick build which gets it much closer to completion. Thats the legal way.

The not so legal way is to pay someone to build it for you, and you represent yourself as the builder in the logs and get the repairman certificate when its given its special airworthiness certificate.

The slightly more legal way is to find one new on the market built by a professional builder and do not get the repairman certificate, and use an A&P for the annual (i mean condition inspection).. you can still do all maintenance if you want.
 
Or you can buy one almost completed, finish it yourself, and maybe get the repairman certificate or maybe not. I think I saw a -10 for sale that was mostly done, needed an engine and panel and some finish work, I seem to recall theyanted $85K for it. Could be wrong, but I think that was the price.
 
Hi Guys,

You can't compare a $200k RV-10 to a similarly equipped/priced certified aircraft. The "life cycle" costs will be much, much different.

Do your own MX vs A&P/IA
Condition inspections vs annuals
"experimental" avionics vs certified
Parts vs PMA parts

The list goes on....

At the end of 10 years, your overall price tag will be far different.

Richman
 
Doggtyred said:
You can buy a quick build which gets it much closer to completion. Thats the legal way.

The not so legal way is to pay someone to build it for you, and you represent yourself as the builder in the logs and get the repairman certificate when its given its special airworthiness certificate.

The slightly more legal way is to find one new on the market built by a professional builder and do not get the repairman certificate, and use an A&P for the annual (i mean condition inspection).. you can still do all maintenance if you want.
Click to expand...

Another legal way, and probably the smartest, is to hire a professional builder to assist you in building it. That way you actually end up with the knowledge and experience required to use that Repairman's certificate and you don't waste a bunch of time, money, and materials making mistakes and figuring things out.
 
Richman67 said:
Hi Guys,

You can't compare a $200k RV-10 to a similarly equipped/priced certified aircraft. The "life cycle" costs will be much, much different.

Do your own MX vs A&P/IA
Condition inspections vs annuals
"experimental" avionics vs certified
Parts vs PMA parts

The list goes on....

At the end of 10 years, your overall price tag will be far different.

Richman
Click to expand...
It just depends. For the most part, most of the repairs on my experimental flybaby have been marginally cheaper if at all over an equal certified.

The difference is I don't need an A&P as much on my experimental although that could be worked out on a certified.

The biggest cost gain over certified is with avionics and if you won't be buying avionics you lose that.
 
jesse said:
The biggest cost gain over certified is with avionics and if you won't be buying avionics you lose that.
Click to expand...

$40,000 experimental/certified mix IFR glass panel and autopilot Vs $???,??? for an all certified panel. Agree.
 
RV10flyer said:
$40,000 experimental/certified mix IFR glass panel and autopilot Vs $???,??? for an all certified panel. Agree.
Click to expand...

I'm $40k into my panel including install, adding an AP can be done between $7500 and $30,000 depending on what unit I use and new or used, and $8k you will spend on the radio regardless, if you want IFR. I would like to be able to install a TruTrack though.
 
Last edited:
Henning said:
Another legal way, and probably the smartest, is to hire a professional builder to assist you in building it. That way you actually end up with the knowledge and experience required to use that Repairman's certificate and you don't waste a bunch of time, money, and materials making mistakes and figuring things out.
Click to expand...
Yep, or anywhere in between 100% DIY and pro-assist. I think some builders stumble a bit on what's in between.

I started my build with a week-long tail building class involving my tail kit and 2 pros. It's difficult imagining how someone with zero aluminum aircraft building skills can do a first rate job on their first attempt though many do. In one week I went from zero to 100% confidence in tackling any and all aluminum work on my '10. Not to mention a finished fin, rudder and 50% complete stabilizer.

I've played with composites since model airplane days but I took a weekend class on RV composites to help me tackle that set of challenges.

So if there is any interest in building combined with $$$, there are a lot of legal and satisfying options.
jesse said:
It just depends. For the most part, most of the repairs on my experimental flybaby have been marginally cheaper if at all over an equal certified.

The difference is I don't need an A&P as much on my experimental although that could be worked out on a certified.

The biggest cost gain over certified is with avionics and if you won't be buying avionics you lose that.
Click to expand...
I would think that a big difference is the level of work required on a Fly Baby and an RV10, avionics just being a part of it. The repairman's certificate is the big one though.
RV10flyer said:
I love my Trutrak Digiflight II VSGV!

http://www.trutrakflightsystems.com/documents/DigiflightIIOperatingManual.pdf
Click to expand...
I love mine too! The newer GRT and Garmin experimental units must be sweet too but I can't imagine how they work any better.
 
Bill Watson said:
I would think that a big difference is the level of work required on a Fly Baby and an RV10, avionics just being a part of it. The repairman's certificate is the big one though.
Click to expand...
The parts of that work are often not any cheaper that a certified. The labor is what is going to cost you and you can do it yourself certified with the right relationships. For those that aren't going to do it themselves the cost different is going to be pretty nil assuming similar vintage aircraft of similar condition are being compared.
 
It's 2022. My interest is for an RV10 (or similar 4 place homebuilt) with a turboprop engine. Someone in Florida (TurboAero?) is coming out with a throttled down (200 hp equivalent) turboprop engine that supposedly burns 12.5 gph. Might be underpowered for an RV10 which generally is fitted with a 540 engine. Just a thought as I've always dreamed of a 4 place turboprop with good fuel economy. Might always be just a dream.
 
Is there a competition I am missing out on?



Also… I always thought a pair of those on a load hauler (like a Seneca) would be cool. Jet fuel is heavy, need more useful load…
 
timotb said:
It's 2022. My interest is for an RV10 (or similar 4 place homebuilt) with a turboprop engine. Someone in Florida (TurboAero?) is coming out with a throttled down (200 hp equivalent) turboprop engine that supposedly burns 12.5 gph. Might be underpowered for an RV10 which generally is fitted with a 540 engine. Just a thought as I've always dreamed of a 4 place turboprop with good fuel economy. Might always be just a dream.
Click to expand...

The low fuel consumption small turbine has been a dream for 70 years. I wish these guys well. Got a website?

And a 200 HP RV-10 would be fine. If the engine had a flat rating to (say) 12K' or 15K', it would probably perform as well or better than a stock RV-10 in mid-high altitude cruise, which is the design point for the airplane anyway.
 
timotb said:
It's 2022. My interest is for an RV10 (or similar 4 place homebuilt) with a turboprop engine. Someone in Florida (TurboAero?) is coming out with a throttled down (200 hp equivalent) turboprop engine that supposedly burns 12.5 gph. Might be underpowered for an RV10 which generally is fitted with a 540 engine. Just a thought as I've always dreamed of a 4 place turboprop with good fuel economy. Might always be just a dream.
Click to expand...

Sigh. We’ve seen this movie before— Innodyn anyone? Spoiler alert —it doesn’t end well. I’ve been following alternative engine development for around 25 years now and those years are littered with vapor ware and failed attempts in the R&D stage. In all those years nothing has been brought to market as a viable and effective Lycoming/Continental replacement. I’m with Kyle in wishing them success but I’m not holding my breath. Right now my money is on a promising diesel: https://vansairforce.net/community/showthread.php?t=203514. But again until they are actively in production and are actually installing packages, it’s all just wishful thinking. In the meantime, I’m gonna continue to crank up my tried and true 540 and go fly.
 
Last edited:
tsts4 said:
Sigh. We’ve seen this movie before— Innodyn anyone? Spoiler alert —it doesn’t end well. I’ve been following alternative engine development for around 25 years now and those years are littered with vapor ware and failed attempts in the R&D stage. In all those years nothing has been brought to market as a viable and effective Lycoming/Continental replacement. I’m with Kyle in wishing them success but I’m not holding my breath. Right now my money is on a promising diesel: https://vansairforce.net/community/showthread.php?t=203514. But again until they are actively in production and are actually installing packages, it’s all just wishful thinking. In the meantime, I’m gonna continue to crank up my tried and true 540 and go fly.
Click to expand...

Abolition of 100LL might make even the most inefficient turbine make sense.

I crave Jet A, but the RV-10 with TP100 and its ... 173kts... was pretty disappointing given the costs to bring it to fruition.

I was into the subsonex at first too, but the NTSB reports are somewhat sobering.
 
Warmi said:
How about this - https://www.pbsaerospace.com/aerospace-products/engines/turboprop-engines/ts-100-turboshaft-engine

They claim 15 gallons jet fuel per hour at 75% power settings.
Click to expand...

When someone’s got a FWF package developed, that’s affordable (ie less than $65k for whole package) and they are selling them for a 10, then I’ll get excited.

As far as performance, it sounds ok at altitude, it’s getting up there that’s the rub. 241hp at gross and the 10 is gonna be a real dog of a performer, especially if its hot. I’d have to see the results of their test program for the one they installed on a 10 to get real interested.
 
Last edited:
schmookeeg said:
Abolition of 100LL might make even the most inefficient turbine make sense.
Click to expand...

Maybe, as then you’ll have a much larger fleet to supply that could bring economies of scale into play. That might make it affordable both from an initial acquisition cost but also ongoing maintenance. I still think a diesel or electric is gonna win this race for the piston GA fleet.
 
The guy posts a question about an RV-10 and leaves the building. Ha!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top