What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

RV-12 vs Zenith CH 650

Texas Flyer

Active Member
Hope this thread is ok...
Several of us from our EAA group are thinking of starting a group build with either an RV-12 or Zenith CH 650.
The CH650 seems to be about $10,00 less, and the payload and cabin width seemed a little better, if we calculated things correctly.
Anyone care to offer some words of wisdom?
 
Hope this thread is ok...
Several of us from our EAA group are thinking of starting a group build with either an RV-12 or Zenith CH 650.
The CH650 seems to be about $10,00 less, and the payload and cabin width seemed a little better, if we calculated things correctly.
Anyone care to offer some words of wisdom?

It has been discussed in the past.

A couple of old threads found using search are HERE and HERE
 
A very experienced RV builder friend was tasked with completing that Zenith model. I went and looked at a lot of the details of its design and construction. Now - I am no expert, having just built one RV12. But I tell you - go take a veeeeeery close look at the Zenith. Compared to an RV, it is the difference between building a car and a go-kart. I can't print here what he has to say about the plane! I had considered one and am SO glad I built the -12.
 
I agree with Bill H. The RV is a far superior kit and finished aircraft. Furthermore, you'll actually have more value in the RV12 if you ever want to sell it.
Strictly my opinion.
 
Not yet that we know of, but sooner or later, someone will depart with the spar pins laying on the floorboards, and the wings WILL come off.

This should not be possible unless they modify the original design, which disables the starter for the engine if both pins are not properly installed.
 
.... Compared to an RV, it is the difference between building a car and a go-kart...
Depending on where and how I?m driving, I might prefer the go-car. On some courses I?ve see shifter carts completely obliterate fully prepped cars.

It all comes down to your mission.

Not to mention that no wings have fallen off RV12's !

Funny thing, no wings have fallen of a CH650 either.

That said, I have seen 601 builders sell their planes to build an RV but I?m yet to see someone sell their RV to build a Zenair.
 
Bill R. - true, it does depend on the mission. But the original post seemed to be about a possible $10,000 difference as the motivator, spread amongst several people. With several people involved, I imagine the consensus will be to build a car, not to get a go-cart instead that is 7/8ths the price of the car. Now, If I wanted a go-kart kind of plane, There are a bunch of other choices than either the 650 or -12, at substantially more than a 10K$ difference! Sonex comes to mind. The other posts referenced above are also very good info.
 
CH 650 VS RV 12

We have a partially completed CH 650 and a flying RV 12.
Each design has it pluses. The Zenith kit will require more assemble preparation.
The RV is a very mature kit. The RV piece parts require little additional preparation and the instruction documentation is very thorough.
We also have a two Zeniths in our hangar (601 and a 650).
Contact me off line if you know someone looking for partially built CH 650B
 
questions

Kitplanes, in their buyer's guide, states the following: Number built and flown: RV-12: 398, CH 650: 528; Build time RV-12: 800 hours, CH 650: 500 hours; Useful load RV-12: 580 lbs, CH 650: 625 lbs.
Some of this conflicts with what I read in these forums. Anyone have better information? Are these stats valid or does Kitplanes have a bias toward the CH 650? 45 lbs more useful load for the CH 650 is significant.
 
Last edited:
Can't speak directly to the 650 or the RV12, but am peripherally involved in a 750 build. The level of completeness of the Zenith drawing set is, at best, disappointing and does not match up with the company's advertising about the maturity of the kit. We spend more time trying to figure out the drawings than actually building the airplane. Many of the folks involved are repeat builders, including at least two plans builders, so there's no lack of know-how, just a huge lack of clarity and completeness in the drawings. Revision tracking in the drawings is simply awful.
 
Last edited:
Correct me if I am wrong but the following are some of the differences that I find in the RV-12 and the CH 650:
RF-12
More of them flying
More robust company
More robust forum
Easier to build
Easily removable wings
Higher resale value
No wing falling off issues history (CH 601)
More mature kit

CH 650
Cheaper
Supports a Parachute
Fuel in wings
More engines supported
Can build as a tail drager
 
You mention the CH601. If I remember correctly, the 601XL had multiple fatalities from in-flight breakup. One aircraft lost a wing in cruise flight and another lost a wing in the traffic pattern. The FAA took a very unusual stance for experimental aircraft that no AWC would be issued for this design. Zenith charged customers several hundred dollars for a wing "fix" kit.
 
You mention the CH601. If I remember correctly, the 601XL had multiple fatalities from in-flight breakup. One aircraft lost a wing in cruise flight and another lost a wing in the traffic pattern. The FAA took a very unusual stance for experimental aircraft that no AWC would be issued for this design. Zenith charged customers several hundred dollars for a wing "fix" kit.

The 750 Cruiser format is slowly making it into the ranks, IMHO. Is there a good market for a Van?s high winger of sorts to be designed?
Safer with gas in wings and flip over egress.....maybe a low priced high wing SLSA trainer. Or, are they limited to just low wingers?
 
650 vs RV12

I fly an AMD factory built 601XL.
No aircraft that have had the upgrades have had any breakups.
The 650/601's are real bargains due to their tarnished reputations as their value has never recovered.
I purchased my Factory Built aircraft for a fraction of the cost of a RV12, and for less than the cost of a unbuilt kit 601/650.
I'm sure the RV12 is a better aircraft, but for the price of a factory built or kit built 601/650, you can't ignore the difference in prices. Its a lot of bang for your buck. I have mine registered as an ELSA, it originally was an SLSA.
I also prefer an air cooled, direct drive engine.
David Krakowsky N601XP
 
I built a 601xl for less than 25k. I just don?t think that could be done with the 12, even if starting with a used kit like I did. Maybe the biggest reason for that is two-fold. First, there is the tarnished reputation the XL reducing the cost of even second-hand unfinished kits, and second s the ability to use alternative engines. Both result in lower cost to built and both contribute to lower resale value and more difficulty locating a buyer, even with the beefed up wing mods installed.
In summary, if the lowest possible cost to get two people in the air at LSA upper limit speeds is the primary objective, then I don?t believe there is a batter way to achieve that objective than a used Zenith kit.
 
Pardon my saying so, but these parts just don't look like enough beef to keep wings from falling off...

29libgw.png
 
I built a 601xl for less than 25k. I just don?t think that could be done with the 12

This.

My '91 model HDS with a factory-new 4-cyl Jab, Dynon Skyview and BRS 'chute came in under $40k for all the major components. It's not a Ferrari, but it gets me there at 100 mph and 4 gph. Before the 'chute and comforts it weighed in at 515 lbs empty (today closer to 570), with a 1200 lbs gross for +-6g. Extra baggage in wings, welded aluminum wing tanks (no proseal!), wide cabin: those were some clever design tradeoffs!

For some perplexing reason, too many customers were clamoring to sacrifice half of its payload*range utility to go 20 mph faster, in a more complex airplane with a wing that stalls much more dangerously--hence the "601XL" fiasco.

If I were to start again within the same financial constraints, neither the 650 nor the -12 make much sense after BasicMed. If you can afford the new Rotax and the hangar/taxes/fuel, go for -9A and IO-320 instead. Or stretch a bit and get the stunningly beautiful -14, life is short. :D
 
Pardon my saying so, but these parts just don't look like enough beef to keep wings from falling off...

It's not the beef that does the work, it's the aileron counterweights that solve the aeroelastic problems of the original 601XL wing. Well researched computationally by pros before the mods were introduced.
 
Back
Top