What's new
Van's Air Force

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

RV-10 pro's and cons

Weasel

Well Known Member
I have in excess of 1200 hrs of flying 2 different RV-10 airplanes and as with everything - "When you get a little, You want more".

First I want to say I am mostly impressed with the "Total Performance" as Vans advertises it, from the RV-10.

My mission includes but is not limited to:

  • 160+ knot Cruise
  • 800+ lb of payload when carrying enough fuel for 600 NM trip with IFR reserve
  • IFR capabilities
  • Comfortable to fly all year (Summer and Winter)

I did not list short feild operations because I might be willing to give that up and keep the airplane at a paved airport if there is something that can exceed some of the parameters lised as my mission and/or have something better to offer.

Some of the things that I dont care for so much in the RV-10 are:

  • Hard to get in and out of the front seats
  • Rougher ride in turbulance
  • Harder to stay cool
  • No de-ice capabilities
  • Light weight construction of specific items

Hopefully I can explain my thought on each of these items...my writing does not allways portray my thoughts.

Hard to get in and out???? I consider myself young and agil and have no problems whatsoever swinging myself in and out in one smooth motion. The problem comes when I want to give a ride to say an ederly person who has has hip surgury or is just not very flexible anymore. They have no problem stepping up on a Cherokee 6, Saratoga, or Bonanza step and flap and then setting down in the seat. On the RV-10 the first problem is stepping up on step and then the wing without stepping on the flap but it doesnt stop there. When they set down in the seat they can hardly lean over in the pilot side far enough to get ther second foot in past the door post because it is so close to the seatback. basicaly you have to bend your knee up to your chest.

Rough ride???? I understand keeping the wing loading low is what helps get the RV its short feild performance but....its just rough in turbulance compaired to most other singles (keep in mind I have never flown a Cirrus or Cessna 400 so maybe I am illiterate on this).

Hard to cool???? I even have Air Conditioning in my RV-10 but If I dont run it I will have sweat on my back anytime the sun is out and the OAT is above 65 degrees F. In Cessna and Piper airplanes I never break a sweat with up to 80 deg ambient temperature full Sun. Some of this is due to my obssession with keeping the cockpit air tight which results in no path for the vent air to easily exit. We sealed up almost everything we could think of which made it a lot quieter than other RV-10's but I am assuming it reduced the amount of ventilation air flow. Having said that the other RV-10 that I fly has standard air vents and a lot of air flow through the cabin but almost the same result. around 70 deg F. ambient and you have sweat on your back when you land. Not great when going to a business meeting or Sunday morning church.

No De-Ice??? Well I understand it weighs to carry this around and there are probably only a few out there that could utlize this in there mission but what would a guy do if he wanted to add this capabiliy?

Light Weight construction???? I know a lot of the performance comes from reduced weight but I feel like a TROLL when I take someone on a ride. Even people familliar with airplanes! Dont step here on the wing, only on the wing walk area. Dont slam the door like that, Let me shut it. Dont turn the nose wheel by pushing on the wheel pant. Dont let your seat belt sling off your lap when you get out and chip the paint outside the door. Dont mess with the door latch while we are flying. and then when you leave the airport you wonder if a big gusty wind will come along and whack the control surfaces from stop to stop. I mean I dont see Cessna, Piper, and Beechcraft guys worrying much about the control locks nor do I see very many damaged control surfaces on them from misuse.


Where would a guy go if he wanted to upgrade to carry a larger load? Lets say I want to carry 6 people or 4 adults and 300lb of luggage and go 600 kn miles with IFR reserves. And say I dont care if it burns 50GPH of fuel. Even a Piper Propjet meridian or TBM cant do that and best I can tell a Cessna 310R will not even carry that load that far because there is not enough fuel for the IFR reserve.

Would this mean the next step up from a RV-10 is a C414 or King Air?
 
You want a Cessna Caravan single engine prop jet. Just an extra million dollars.

Personally I think you have some valid points, some not.
Sweat? You live in MS. Everyone sweats there, it's horrible.
De-ice? Sure it's possible, but only with a lot of work. Remember you've got the prop, windscreen, and tail as well as the wings.
Turn the wheel by pushing on the fairing? Who does that?
Walk on the wing outside the walk area? Who does that?
Gust damage? No excuse. A perfectly good gust lock can be made out of the tow bar. But you do have to use it.
Getting in and out does require technique and practice. Limited mobility people do better stepping down to the back seat. I use a light weight 2 step stepladder to make it easier to get up on the wing.
I have not noticed the ride to be any worse than on similar airplanes.
And the door must be operated only by the pilot.
 
Re: The rough ride, when you go faster the ride gets rougher. If you were in a sailplane in the desert air you would be coring some nice thermals. Go somewhere at speed and those same thermals become spine-numbing jolts! I have a friend who had an Ovation and he hated it in turbulence.

Yes the Chancellor (C-414) has all the bells and whistles including Pressurization, FIKI, slows down nicely, carries a ton of weight and flies about the same speed as a -10 burning 22 GPH LOP. But the annuals will be budget killers and if you fly ROP at power you'll feel like you are single-handedly supporting the oil companies!

-Marc
 
Last edited:
And...

We used to have a C-421A.

Absolutely WONDERFUL airplane but as previously stated, annuals will kill you and it burns 38 GPH.

OTOH, it will carry the load, go reasonable fast, fly really nice, pressurized, deiced, etc.

Airplanes are ALWAYS a compromise. For most of us here, the RV-10 more than fulfills the mission...
 
My first thought, when reading the thread title was, "Cons?!" The RV-10, for what it does, is by far, IMHO, the best there is. Here is my response to your issues, though:

The front seats are a little tough, but technique makes a big difference. I won't go into detail, but it is a valid point to a certain extent. As another reply said, less agile people can go in the back, which is easy to get in. Also, leaving he flap down on the ground makes it less of an attraction to step on.

It rides the same or smoother than the Cessna and Piper singles I have flown. I have never thought of it as a rough ride in turbulence.

I'm in Florida, and I wouldn't mind an easier way to stay cool, but keeping the door open a few inches in the ground and the fresh air vents in flight has never been "not enough" for me. I don't know what planes I have flown where I don't get sweat on my back upon arrival, but the seats could be made to breathe more if necessary.

Kelley Aerospace has a thermal anti-ice system that can be out on, but it is expensive and it slows you down. I personally think the -10 carries ice very well and have never felt the need for de- or anti-ice.

Any plane can get paint chipped if you hang the seat belts out the door. The black stuff is where you stand on all planes I am familiar with. The doors are the weakest part of the -10, but care on the part of the pilot and some instructions for closing is not necessarily a bad thing. A backup safety system is almost (beyond almost, probably) a must, IMHO, but that makes everything easier and lighter.

Efficiency (nm/gal/lb is probably unbeatable) and total cost of ownership is where the RV-10 shines.
 
Sweat? You live in MS. Everyone sweats there, it's horrible.

My point is if I pay $200K for a new automobile I would be disappointed if I could not be sweating and get into it in 100 deg weather and cool down not the other way around.

Turn the wheel by pushing on the fairing? Who does that?

Exactly! that's what I think. not the first time but latest episode was 3 weeks ago at an airport with a line guy/mechanic helping push the plane backwards. I had specifically said just help push and I will do the steering. Before I could open my mouth he looks over at the wheel and gives the pant a kick to straiten it up :eek: I could have yelled at him and raised cain but it would not have fixed the problem. Next line guy would be all new to it. I know I can cary a tow bar......Still lot of times you walk in the FBO. Line guy says hey is your brakes off?? uh..yes you need to move the plane? probably not but we can move it if we need to. Um well I really wish you wouldn't cause you probably don't have a tow bar that will fit it. Oh yes we do we have 6 Cirrus airplanes based here and move them all the time :mad::mad::mad: Guys this is not a Cirrus! and no the Cirrus towbar will not fit. I would rather not even have to have this conversation. just smile and say sure move it if you need to. I have seen other peoples RV being moved by line personal who just push it backwards and let the nose wheel slide sideways against the pivot stop :eek: wonder how they handle my equipment and yours when you are not looking.

Walk on the wing outside the walk area? Who does that?

Exactly! Again my thought...but...several times I have had passengers get out and back up. Especialy tall people and even after being told to "step only on the black" back up to get out from under the door. 200+ pounder standing on 1 foot in the middle of my second wing bay makes me cringe. Then the next thing they want to rotate the middle of there foot on the trailing edge of the wing bending the skin down to rub on the flap. Again. after being told not to step there.

Gust damage? No excuse. A perfectly good gust lock can be made out of the tow bar. But you do have to use it.

True but why don't I have to do this on the Cessna 172 rudder?

And the door must be operated only by the pilot

I don't want to be the scrooge. Hey hey don't open the door. just let me do it you might mess it up. I can say it a lot nicer than that but when they walk away they still get the idea that I am overly sensitive about the airplane and consider them incapable of anything.

It rides the same or smoother than the Cessna and Piper singles I have flown. I have never thought of it as a rough ride in turbulence.

Thanks Jesse. I don't have a lot of time in the faster singles but I do know the Cherokee 6 I drive is WAY smoother in the same air. maybe not fair comparison.


Efficiency (nm/gal/lb is probably unbeatable) and total cost of ownership is where the RV-10 shines.

I agree they are very efficient rides!!!:)

I guess I am just getting old and grumpy. need to just go check myself in at the old peoples home :rolleyes:
 
Only con

The only con I think the RV-10 has is the entry cost due to the high demand for it. 175k to 200k is a lot of coins for this jewel. I would love to have one but ended up buying a Twin Comanche instead (and saved about 150k). The -10 does so many things well. To get short field capability, fast cruise, and relatively low fuel burn requires compromises such as low wing loading and so forth. At the end of the day, the -10 is a fine design and have made a bunch of owners very proud. Maybe one plane that does everything well just doesn't exist yet but the -10 gets mighty close.
 
My point is if I pay $200K for a new automobile I would be disappointed if I could not be sweating and get into it in 100 deg weather and cool down not the other way around.

Exactly! that's what I think. not the first time but latest episode was 3 weeks ago at an airport with a line guy/mechanic helping push the plane backwards. I had specifically said just help push and I will do the steering. Before I could open my mouth he looks over at the wheel and gives the pant a kick to straiten it up :eek: I could have yelled at him and raised cain but it would not have fixed the problem. Next line guy would be all new to it. I know I can cary a tow bar......Still lot of times you walk in the FBO. Line guy says hey is your brakes off?? uh..yes you need to move the plane? probably not but we can move it if we need to. Um well I really wish you wouldn't cause you probably don't have a tow bar that will fit it. Oh yes we do we have 6 Cirrus airplanes based here and move them all the time :mad::mad::mad: Guys this is not a Cirrus! and no

True but why don't I have to do this on the Cessna 172 rudder?

I don't want to be the scrooge. Hey hey don't open the door. just let me do it you might mess it up. I can say it a lot nicer than that but when they walk away they still get the idea that I am overly sensitive about the airplane s:

If I paid $200K for a car, I'd expect it to fly!
RVs are unusual airplanes. Like sports cars. If you drove your exotic sports car to a club, would you hand over the keys to some 17 year old attendant? Don't let FBOs mess with your plane. Tell them you'll park it, and you don't want it touched.

172s have a rudder tied to the nose gear thru a spring. That makes it harder for the wind to move the rudder. It also makes it harder for the pilot to move the rudder. Do you want light, responsive controls? Or heavy controls that are resistant to the wind? You cannot have both.

In 172s I'm always correcting people attempting to slam the door closed with the handle already forward. Most Cessnas already have repairs where the dead bolt slams into the fuselage skin. The RV10 door must be closed with care. I try to be diplomatic by helping to load right side people, then closing the door myself, from the outside. Passengers opening the door is not an issue.

The bottom line is that airplanes are not cars. A different set of engineering compromises.
 
Last edited:
Hard to get in and out????
I agree that it's not ideal, but a few tricks go a long way... I put nonskid on top of the front seat fwd bulkheads and leave the pax seat slid all the way back. I tell a pax to put their left foot on the nonskid, put their butt against the seat back, then their right foot on the nonskid. Then they can just slide down.

But it's definitely more involved than jumping into a 182 and slamming the door shut.

At least we have two doors, and don't have to slide across the pax seat to get in the pilots side.

Rough ride????
This hasn't bothered me much yet, but like you, I don't have a lot of hours in other planes to compare. I do think it handles wind and bumps better than the 182 I flew before.

Hard to cool????

Can't help you there. I only have a few months of heat to deal with in Minnesota, and cracking the door and the airflow from the overhead console have been enough to keep me not miserable.

No De-Ice??? Well I understand it weighs to carry this around and there are probably only a few out there that could utlize this in there mission but what would a guy do if he wanted to add this capabiliy?

OK, Living in Minnesota, I DO wish there was a better integrated option for deice. Not that I want to go head first into severe known icing...

Light Weight construction???? I know a lot of the performance comes from reduced weight but I feel like a TROLL when I take someone on a ride. Even people familliar with airplanes! Dont step here on the wing, only on the wing walk area. Dont slam the door like that, Let me shut it.

I agree with you on this one. I've had a few pax jump in the plane and try to slam the door like a 1978 Chevy truck before I could explain how things work. I should probably try to brief them sooner, when I'm explaining the "step here, not here" thing. And I agree with you on the flap thing too. I know I want to have my cake and eat it too... light vs bulletproof... same goes for the rudder flopping around in the wind. I feel like there should be a factory supported option to prevent damage from light wind.

Where would a guy go if he wanted to upgrade to carry a larger load? Lets say I want to carry 6 people or 4 adults and 300lb of luggage and go 600 kn miles with IFR reserves. And say I dont care if it burns 50GPH of fuel. Even a Piper Propjet meridian or TBM cant do that and best I can tell a Cessna 310R will not even carry that load that far because there is not enough fuel for the IFR reserve.

Would this mean the next step up from a RV-10 is a C414 or King Air?

I do that mental exercise a few times a year. "What would I get if someone offered me way too much for my RV10, and I inherited a few mil from a long lost relative".

If I wanted to stay with a piston single, I think it might be a Piper Matrix. I think that could meet your 600km with IFR reserves, hauling 6 "FAA people". And a 20-30 knot boost in speed over the 10.
$700-$800K for a newer used one, with a G1000. New $950k.

If we get into a kerosene burner, those Epics are monsters! 1120 useful load, with FULL FUEL! 1500HP does wonders! That gives you 1650NM range with IFR reserves, at 265kts econ cruise. If you're in a hurry, 1385NM, at 325KTS! AND you should be able to operate out of a 3000' runway. But all that performance isn't cheap. You could have 15 nice RV10's at the Epic's $3m pricetag. Or $1.8m for a used one, if you can find one.
 
Well-Sealed Cabin?

You can add a cabin air exit that's designed for the job, like the one on the top tailcone of Bonanzas.

It's something that's been neglected on a lot of RVs. Most let the cabin air escape anywhere it wants to and that adds drag. So you'd get better airflow in the cabin no matter how the cabin air exhausts, if it can, but you'll get lower drag if you have an exit that's designed for the purpose.

Dave
 
Same Price As RV-10 Kit and Components

Cessna P210. Six place, easy entry and exit, cruise 180 KT at 18,000, some have deice boots, some have AC, good range, decent short-field performance. But Cessna hugely overcharging for parts, complex to maintain, airframes 35? years old.
 
Turbine Evolution

You can easily solve your problem for $1.5M

Deice Boots, Parachute, Air conditioning, 4000 Ft/min climb rate, one of the most reliable engines ever made 750HP PT6.

A few months ago I had the opportunity to fly this plane and it was incredible, if I had the money this is what I would have. Unlike the other Lancairs it was very docile and had a solid safe feel to it.

30244835515_aba7e398f2_h.jpg


29948300490_9c53399479_h.jpg


Rob Hickman
N402RH RV-10
 
Where would a guy go if he wanted to upgrade to carry a larger load? Lets say I want to carry 6 people or 4 adults and 300lb of luggage and go 600 kn miles with IFR reserves. And say I dont care if it burns 50GPH of fuel.

Would this mean the next step up from a RV-10 is a C414 or King Air?

Those are sissy airplanes. Two words: Cessna Caravan! Haul anything that fits through the doors. And they are big doors; no entry problems. Air conditioning. De-ice. And it will operate from your place, although you would need to jack up the hangar roof a little.

And it will back up. Think how cool you would be at the catfish fly-in ;)
 
Those are sissy airplanes. Two words: Cessna Caravan! Haul anything that fits through the doors. And they are big doors; no entry problems. Air conditioning. De-ice. And it will operate from your place, although you would need to jack up the hangar roof a little.

And it will back up. Think how cool you would be at the catfish fly-in ;)

don't think I haven't been looking at them :eek: been watching the Compair stock market too
 
What about a Cessna P337 Skyrocket?

Two Engines
Fast
De-Ice
Fly off your grass runway
Pressurized
6 Seats

You can find a really nice one for less than your RV-10 is worth.

29616803164_646aa06e28_c.jpg



Rob Hickman
N402RH RV-10
 
What about a Cessna P337 Skyrocket?

Two Engines
Fast
De-Ice
Fly off your grass runway
Pressurized
6 Seats



Rob Hickman
N402RH RV-10

Even at 5 seats why is this airplane not very popular? I have heard old tales of the rear engine overheating but I am assuming with careful handling it could be managed.
 
Even at 5 seats why is this airplane not very popular? I have heard old tales of the rear engine overheating but I am assuming with careful handling it could be managed.

Because, for a twin, it's relatively slow. Slower than the T210, and it costs more to run.
 
Because, for a twin, it's relatively slow. Slower than the T210, and it costs more to run.

Cessna T210
Maximum speed: 204 knots (235 mph, 378 km/h) at 17,000 ft (5,200 m)
Cruise speed: 193 knots (222 mph, 358 km/h) at 20,000 ft (6,100 m)
Stall speed: 58 knots (67 mph, 108 km/h) CAS, flaps down, power off
Climb rate with 1 engine out: -900 ft/min ?

P337 Rocket 2
Maximum Speed: 214 knots
Normal Cruise Speed - 30 GPH 204 knots
Stall Speed: 48 knots
Climb rate with 1 engine out: 375 ft/min

Rob Hickman
N402RH RV-10
 
Ah, the Rocket, not the Skymaster. I missed that. The Rocket's a nice plane-if you can stomach that fuel burn.
 
Fuel burn

I flight plan 160 kt and 15 gals/hr in my 6place twin Comanche. It's a solid IFR platform and handles turbulence well with its 1000lb payload. With 90gal of fuel, it will push the bathroom breaks to the max. The single passenger entry door may be an issue but the rear baggage door is nice. Those duel io320's are rock solid and the counter roatating props makes single engine work easier than a Diamond Da-40. Who would have ever thought a 50 year old twin would still be beating the efficiency of newer twins. She is a sweetheart flyer.


Ah, the Rocket, not the Skymaster. I missed that. The Rocket's a nice plane-if you can stomach that fuel burn.
 
Interesting thread. Personally I think the pro's outweighs the cons with regards to the rv-10. It is an airplane after all, and all airplanes seem to be compromises in one way or another.
As for rough riding, that's what the throttle is for. At 125 KIAS it will ride the bumps very comfortably. Currently we are out in Page Arizona with a group of 10 RV's and doing all of the sightseeing trips out here. The last time I brought Carol out here was with the kids and we were in a Bonanza. Yesterday as we were crossing the Canyon in the afternoon bumps she said thanks for bringing her back in a nicer riding airplane! So that's a non-pilots experience.

With almost 2000 hours in RV's now and time in almost every single engine GA Airplane, there is not one of them out there that I would trade for my RV10, even if it was offered as an even-up trade brand new.

But as usual, what makes the world go around is that we all don't like the same thing. That's a good thing. :)

Vic
 
Absolutely. Another 100-150lb would make all the difference. But then you guys can declare what you like......
 
Thanks, Vic

"With almost 2000 hours in RV's now and time in almost every single engine GA Airplane, there is not one of them out there that I would trade for my RV10, even if it was offered as an even-up trade brand new."

That's the kind of post that makes me happy to soldier-on with the build - which at this point is looking to take too long, too much time away from my young second family, and come in over our budget. It will be worth it in the end, if I can stay the course and walk the lines :)
 
That's the kind of post that makes me happy to soldier-on with the build - which at this point is looking to take too long, too much time away from my young second family, and come in over our budget. It will be worth it in the end, if I can stay the course and walk the lines :)

I have the same thoughts all the time. Seems I'm not alone. Having a young family makes building and airplane hard, but I'm hoping it will be worth the sacrifices in the end, to all of us.
 
+1

With almost 2000 hours in RV's now and time in almost every single engine GA Airplane, there is not one of them out there that I would trade for my RV10, even if it was offered as an even-up trade brand new.

I get this all the time, people asking me what plane would I like to "upgrade" to "next." I have to stop and think. If money were no object, sure I'd have a Kodiak, Caravan, Epic, or a Jet - or all of them! But since it is, I can't think of anything I would move up to - considering RV-10 performance, cost of operation and my mission.

A prominent RV person with tons of time in all RVs and whom you would ALL recognize told me that he believes the RV-10 is the finest 4-place piston single ever built. Hard to disagree when you've flown one.

Now, having a second airplane with an entirely different mission, that's a different proposition entirely:)
 
Having spend a ton of time (years) contemplating the build of my RV10 several aircraft came across my mind. Many listed in this thread. I really think it comes down to mission. I looked seriously at the evolution. But at the end of the day the majority of my anticipated rv10 flights will be afternoon/day trips or long eeekend trips. Also included in this are fly ins and the $100 hamburger run. Right there I decided the evolution was out. That is a serious airplane that is a cross country machine from the ground up. The small list of cons certainly do NOT outweigh huge list of pros. Plus I have a Christen Eagle for that other type of flying ;)
 
Even though it is four place ours is mostly used as single soul on board...but seats and baggage have components on board.
Just last Saturday 11 am...winery had breakdown.... diagnosed part is Santa Rosa California and we are in Wa...within hour our Rv10 was in the air fighting a 45 mph head wind. 1300 mile Round trip and winery machine was up and running before midnight. We could not ask for a better aircraft for this use considering cost of operation and performance.
 
Back
Top