Which RV to Build....

ARFlyer

ARFlyer

En-Route
Joined
Dec 31, 2011
Messages
3,187
Location
Central AR
Display Name
Display name:
ARFlyer
I've been tossing around the idea about building a plane the last year or two. As I can't find any cert aircraft in a decent price range with my preferred options.

I'm stuck between several models and can't figure out which direction to start going. I'm also completely green on anything building related so I'll be starting from square 1.

I ultimately want a full IFR w/ A/P cross country cruiser. So the models I've been going back and forth on are -7A, 9A, or 14A. I'm going the QB direction because of my very limited building experience and skill.

Any ideas?
 
I’ve window shopped the RV series for awhile and I’ve come to the determination that if I ever go that route the -14A would be my pick.

Although the 14 isn’t quite as fast of a cruiser as the -7, if I were flying IFR, I think I’d want the -14A, plus I like the wider cabin too.

They’re all a sexy group of airplanes though.
 
If you want aerobatics, get the 7 or 14. The 14 is probably a little more expensive than the 7 or 9, but supposedly goes together a little easier. Maybe not so much the structure, but I hear other parts are a little better planned. I wanted to spend a little less and like the closer cockpit, so I went with the 7. Also wanted aerobatic capability.
 
I think one should build an airplane because they want to build, not because they want X, Y, or Z airplane. Plenty of already built examples are for sale, and one of those can always have its avionics refurbished to one's desires.
 
I hear it isn't cheaper to build than buy.

I owned a 9a. Think C-150 handling and landing with a 148 kt cruise and 1000 fpm climb but 100 kt maneuvering speed. only 36 gallon fuel capacity.

A 7a brings more speed, more fuel capacity, bigger engines, higher resale.

A 14 is bigger. time will determine whether they command higher resale.

Now a 10 would be my choice. ..
 
Very sexy and very good aircraft across the board.

I built and fly an RV10. It’s a fantastic traveling machine and a joy to fly, but no acro. Big engine, roomy cabin, more $$$. It is exact what we wanted for our travels.

CC cruiser, I’d recommend the 14 or the 10. The later models are more highly evolved than earlier ones.

I was a first time builder and it looks like a one time builder. QB recommended... it doesn’t alter the learning curve it just eliminates a lot of repetitive work.

I built it to get the plane I wanted to fly. Key was having a Maule to fly during the build.

Good Luck!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
 
Vans has an online cost estimator. Use it, but add $20k extra for avionics. You're likely to spend that much more than is in their estimate.

The -14 will end up being $40k more than a -7 or -9. The 7 and 14 are aerobatic, and the -14 has a lot more interior room.

Now it is up to you to choose the best compromise for your mission.
 
What do you want to do? That's the first question.

If you want aerobatics, I'd personally go with the 7 because it will be significantly less expensive. The 7 is also the fastest RV out there if you want an IO-360 and don't mind the fuel burn. But it only gets something in the neighborhood of 650-700 lbs of useful load, so if you want to take someone with you, you'll be hampered.

For a cross country traveller, I'd recommend the RV-9. I think its a bit larger and more comfortable, but still in the range most pilots would call "fast", even with an o-320 (which means lower operating cost and less complexity). I believe the 9 is also mostly match drilled in the kit, meaning less time drill and deburring during the build process.

Do you have another mission that you'd like to fly?
 
The RV-7 and -9 have (effectively) identical fuselages, and offer the same interior comforts. Any differences are due to the spar carry through structure, differences in the empennage, etc.
 
14...my hangar neighbor is building one and it is gonna be amazing. He’s been working on it for 3 1/2 years though. Quick build. It’s a ton of work. Every time I walk over there I am reminded that there is no way I would have the patience to build one myself.
 
From my research lately, it looks like you can buy a built -9(a)....add some avionics, and end up less than 100k probably, to get IFR cert with A/P.
Otherwise, you're looking at a lot of work and 100k-up, or buying at over 100k.
If that's way off, hopefully someone will correct me.
 
FORANE said:
I hear it isn't cheaper to build than buy.
Click to expand...
Often.
The RV's seem to command a price premium because, well, everyone seems to want an RV and never looks at anything else that flies just as well at a much lower price. Just like a Cub vs. a Champ.

For an example of an other than a RV design - I paid about the price of the kit alone (well less than the price of a new engine) for my current already done been flying rag and tube ride.
 
bflynn said:
What do you want to do? That's the first question.

If you want aerobatics, I'd personally go with the 7 because it will be significantly less expensive. The 7 is also the fastest RV out there if you want an IO-360 and

don't mind the fuel burn. But it only gets something in the neighborhood of 650-700 lbs of useful load, so if you want to take someone with you, you'll be hampered.

For a cross country traveller, I'd recommend the RV-9. I think its a bit larger and more comfortable, but still in the range most pilots would call "fast", even with an o-320 (which means lower operating cost and less complexity). I believe the 9 is also mostly match drilled in the kit, meaning less time drill and deburring during the build process.

Do you have another mission that you'd like to fly?
Click to expand...

The 7 is not the fastest rv. Using same engine comparisons from vans web page both the 4 and 8 are faster, as they should because of the lesser flat plate drag.

Bob
 
The monetary cost for building vs buying an RV is basically a wash. The big difference is you have tinbuild the kit which can allow you to spread the cost over time. So the first question you need to ask yourself AFTER you define your mission is do you want to build or fly? if you want to build, build--if you want to fly, buy.
 
BTW, if you post your question on the Vans forum, you will weed out responses from those who don't know anything about RVs. ;)
 
RoscoeT said:
BTW, if you post your question on the Vans forum, you will weed out responses from those who don't know anything about RVs. ;)
Click to expand...
Exactly!!!!!

Plus you won't get *******s suggesting sensible alternatives like T-18s or Wittman Tailwinds...
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
Exactly!!!!!

Plus you won't get *******s suggesting sensible alternatives like T-18s or Wittman Tailwinds...
Click to expand...

To be fair the OP did ask specifically about RVs and not generically about any E-AB. Granted the 2 makes you mention are fine aircraft, but they aren't RVs are they regardless of their pros and cons?
 
I was looking at a 10. But I've read reviews that said if you arn't carrying four people regularly then go for a two seater.

I'd love to build it but I'm concerned about my lack of skill and knowledge. We have a few EAA chapters but the nearest few arn't very active. So I don't know if I have anyone around that could mentor. I have the space to build it and the time. To bad @timwinters isn't closer then South MO.
 
ARFlyer said:
I was looking at a 10. But I've read reviews that said if you arn't carrying four people regularly then go for a two seater.

I'd love to build it but I'm concerned about my lack of skill and knowledge. We have a few EAA chapters but the nearest few arn't very active. So I don't know if I have anyone around that could mentor. I have the space to build it and the time. To bad @timwinters isn't closer then South MO.
Click to expand...

It's not really that difficult, you just have to be persistent more than anything. So not having a local mentor is not necessarily a show stopper. Plus there are plenty of ways to get your hands dirty to see if it's something you really want to pursue:
- Sportair workshops
- local builders
- workshops at OSH and Sun-n-Fun
- practice projects from Vans

Plus there's a ton of online resources-- the how to videos on the EAA site are great and I wish they had been available when I started building. And of course I'm sure you know about VAF.
 
Don't think quick build will be quick. I bought a abandoned QB RV7 and as someone with decades of sheet metal and aircraft experience it still takes several years. Unless you're willing to work it like a job, 8 hours a day, 5 days a week. There is a lot more to it than building a airframe. Mine is 95% done with 50% to go. Yes that's a homebuilder joke, before you decide to comment on my math.
 
Just make sure it doesn't have Hard Surface in the tail number!
 
ARFlyer said:
I'd love to build it but I'm concerned about my lack of skill and knowledge.
Click to expand...
If you want to build, then, by all means, build.
Lots of resources out there - for example, the EAA has a metric buttload of videos on things from riveting to ironing fabric. The FAA publishes stuff for AMTs that you might find useful (and free online).

Lots of people start out not knowing doodily squat about building an airplane.
 
Don’t be scared off regarding the build process. To build the airframe you need to learn some very basic skills, especially with the new match drilled kits.

Why, in *my* day.....

But I digresss. Skills you need are drilling holes, smoothing holes and edges, dimpling/countersinking said holes, clecoing parts together and setting rivets. That gets you off to a good start. All the other systems such as electrical and fuel for example are fairly straightforward and as has been said already, there are plenty of online support groups where you can seek help, such as VAF and Rivetbangers.com. One of the best benefits of building an airplane is meeting some really great people along the way. I can safely say I have not met a fellow RVer that I didn’t like.

Whichever you choose, you’re going to love your airplane, and have a heck of a lot of fun building it.
 
It can be therapeutic to head to the basement in the evening, go through the plans, and drill and debut. Building is enjoyable and I have no timeline when people ask. I feel like that would suck the fun out of it if I were chasing a target. Selling my 172 last week has fueled the motivation again.
 
timwinters said:
Just make sure it doesn't have Hard Surface in the tail number!
Click to expand...

I just might to show them that the HS means Horse Sh@! when it comes to that! :D

painless said:
Don’t be scared off regarding the build process. To build the airframe you need to learn some very basic skills, especially with the new match drilled kits.

Why, in *my* day.....

But I digresss. Skills you need are drilling holes, smoothing holes and edges, dimpling/countersinking said holes, clecoing parts together and setting rivets. That gets you off to a good start. All the other systems such as electrical and fuel for example are fairly straightforward and as has been said already, there are plenty of online support groups where you can seek help, such as VAF and Rivetbangers.com. One of the best benefits of building an airplane is meeting some really great people along the way. I can safely say I have not met a fellow RVer that I didn’t like.

Whichever you choose, you’re going to love your airplane, and have a heck of a lot of fun building it.
Click to expand...

You make it sound all easy! I'm thinking about getting some of the basic tools and doing the Van Tool Box and Elevator projects.

I've already put the the cart in front of the horse today. I've been looking up panel ideas and thinking up paint colors.
 
That 172 is going to seem like you were driving a Caprice Classic station wagon once you fly the RV

Build on!
 
Only RV I'd build for that mission would be a RV4 with the biggest FI engine you could fit, nice CS prop, short thin wings, nice solid state glass panel

I'd also go full anti corrosion on the build, coat before assembly seaplane style, plus I'd look into any spar or otherwise beef ups.
 
ARFlyer said:
I just might to show them that the HS means Horse Sh@! when it comes to that! :D



You make it sound all easy! I'm thinking about getting some of the basic tools and doing the Van Tool Box and Elevator projects.

I've already put the the cart in front of the horse today. I've been looking up panel ideas and thinking up paint colors.
Click to expand...


There are several sayings that have been passed down by RV builders. 90% done, 90% to go for example. The one(s) that stuck with me during my build were “You’re building an airplane, not a watch”. Or “ you’re building an airplane to take a ride on a Sunday afternoon, not a spaceship to go to Mars”.
 
James331 said:
Only RV I'd build for that mission would be a RV4 with the biggest FI engine you could fit, nice CS prop, short thin wings, nice solid state glass panel

I'd also go full anti corrosion on the build, coat before assembly seaplane style, plus I'd look into any spar or otherwise beef ups.
Click to expand...


Putting a big engine on a 4 only makes it nose heavy. I have a 360 and constant speed on mine, it's great for to performance but it does not handle anywhere near as nice as a light fixed pitch 4 and is only a couple of knots faster than a fixed pitch with the right prop.

There is no need to "beef up" anything on a rv-4. The only weak link was fixed years ago and that was the thin weldments on the engine mount pads, and even then the problem with those only showed up an planes that spent a lot of time on rough strips.

The best rv of any model is one built light and simple.

Bob
 
James331 said:
Only RV I'd build for that mission would be a RV4 with the biggest FI engine you could fit, nice CS prop, short thin wings, nice solid state glass panel

I'd also go full anti corrosion on the build, coat before assembly seaplane style, plus I'd look into any spar or otherwise beef ups.
Click to expand...

....aaand there's another one. LOL
 
RoscoeT said:
BTW, if you post your question on the Vans forum, you will weed out responses from those who don't know anything about RVs. ;)
Click to expand...

RoscoeT said:
....aaand there's another one. LOL
Click to expand...
Online message boards are usually a collaboration of various opinions, no matter where the question is posted. You’ll find useless opinions on VAF too, as a question like this is subjective by nature.:rolleyes:
 
Ryanb said:
You’ll find useless opinions on VAF too as a question like this is subjective by nature.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Well the difference is that the VAF forum is mostly made up of RV enthusiasts who are likely to pass along somewhat useful and accurate information on such a basic question as this. The expertise level of some of these responses is not even cursory google quality...more like "I know about those, saw one at a fly-in once". Of course there are some here who do know RVs well. Hopefully the OP can filter the responses appropriately.
 
There are a lot airplanes you could buy for less than a rv-10. You’re going to be well into six figures before you finish a 10 with a IO-540 and avionics. Plus you’re talking quick build.

You could buy a bonanza ready to fly for far less money.
 
jesse said:
There are a lot airplanes you could buy for less than a rv-10. You’re going to be well into six figures before you finish a 10 with a IO-540 and avionics. Plus you’re talking quick build.

You could buy a bonanza ready to fly for far less money.
Click to expand...
Exactly. The OP notes he is specifically discouraged by the certified pricing. The avocational merits of building did not come into the picture, so builders are projecting their reasonable but ultimately irrelevant predilection for building when addressing this question.

You can pick up a 260HP Bonanza or Comanche 250 and fly the snot out of it for the capital difference between it and an RV-7A with the most cursory equivalent AP and /G capability. (Ex-AB panels are notoriously atrocious when it comes to the "afterthought" aspect of it). At such price deltas, the higher mx and operating costs of the certified can are decades of flying out from exceeding the savings realized on their purchase.
 
James331 said:
Those who can't just speak clearly, probably shouldn't bother speaking.
Click to expand...

And those with no familiarity on subject matter should not offer advice to honest and sincere questions. You recommended just about the worst RV model for the OP's mission and level of building experience, in addition to adding nonsensical build options such as "short thin wings" and "spar or otherwise beef ups". Please elaborate on those RV-4 spar beef ups and the history of RV-4 spar issues that would warrant such a comment. Are you suggesting the OP build a Harmon Rocket?
 
hindsight2020 said:
Exactly. The OP notes he is specifically discouraged by the certified pricing. The avocational merits of building did not come into the picture, so builders are projecting their reasonable but ultimately irrelevant predilection for building when addressing this question.

You can pick up a 260HP Bonanza or Comanche 250 and fly the snot out of it for the capital difference between it and an RV-7A with the most cursory equivalent AP and /G capability. (Ex-AB panels are notoriously atrocious when it comes to the "afterthought" aspect of it). At such price deltas, the higher mx and operating costs of the certified can are decades of flying out from exceeding the savings realized on their purchase.
Click to expand...

Largely true. But have you looked at that $50k Comanche? I did. Honestly, the panel layout, vintage stack, hand brake, retro-style interior, and lack of visibility made me think I was in Captain Nemo's submarine. The price and partnership were perfect, but I was vastly underwhelmed with the airplane. Bo's are better, but suffer from some of the same issues, and are stuck with Continental engines. For another >yikes< $100k, I can get an airplane (RV-10) with a new Lycoming, a new prop, a new panel, new paint, new systems, and an interior that wasn't lifted from an Austin Powers movie. Or I could buy a nice RV-6 for $60k, and go faster than the Bo or Comanche, using 2/3 the fuel. I could even do acro in it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top