NEWBIE to Forum RV-14 or RV-7A

Hello Everyone,


This is my first official post in VAF. Im a Private Pilot getting ready to start my first build and the jury is still out on the RV7A vs. RV14A.

My mission: 2 seat aerobatic capable of long cross countries comfortably.

I've sat in the RV14 and rode in an RV7A a few times and going back and forth about which to build.

I've ready plenty of forums with people similar to my size 6'3'' 240 lbs fitting in the RV7s w/o any issues. Still a little uneasy about not being comfortable and people keep mentioning concerns with the nose wheel.

I can swing the $$$ for the RV14 over time, but like the affordability of the RV7. Just don't want to wish I would have spent the extra money for the 14 to gain the space if I go the RV7A path.

Additionally I like the idea of the new instructions and less fab time on the RV14 especially being a new builder.


Thoughts on my path? Anyone my size regret or would have went with a 14 if it was available when the started?



Roger

Welcome to the good ship, as Mike will say shortly.

I don't think you will ever wish you had gone with a -7 if you build the -14" but very likely may regret going with a -7 instead of the -14. If you can afford it, then that's probably your best bet. You can fit in a -7, but the -14 will fit you much better, especially for long flights.

You might want to double check the relative fab times of the -7 vs -14. I've heard stories from very reliable sources that the -14 is not nearly as easy to build as was anticipated.

Ed_Wischmeyer said:

You might want to double check the relative fab times of the -7 vs -14. I've heard stories from very reliable sources that the -14 is not nearly as easy to build as was anticipated.

Click to expand...

Having helped build a -7 and currently building a -14A I would say the -14 is way easier. Almost zero "fabrication" of parts so far, just pull out the parts and debur prime and assemble. Keep in mind that you still have to learn basic sheet metal skills such as riveting to be able to build either kit.

Unless you're adamantly opposed to tandem seating, you might also want to consider the RV-8 too. It'll easily accommodate your size, has lots of baggage capacity for cross country trips, and when you want to do some acro, nothing beats sitting on the centerline of the airframe with the stick in your right hand and the throttle in your left.

Also, having helped friends build both 7s and 8s, my opinion is that the 8 goes together a little quicker than the 7, especially if you're building the QB kits.

I am happy with the 9A I am trying to get finished, but I would add the $$ in a heartbeat to be at the same stage with a 14. My next build will be a Kitfox or Just Aircraft so I will be happy with the 9A!

Welcome

Welcome Roger.
Best of luck with whatever you decide. Vans doesn't make a bad airplane.

Personal choice, but can't go wrong either way

I too had this back and forth between the 7 and 14.

PRO's for RV7:
I think it exemplifies the "total performance" philosophy a bit better. Faster, shorter take off rolls, better climb, all on less power. Plus cheaper!! There are more flying examples to look at as well...could help for ideas with your build.

Now keep in mind I'm 5'9, so the -7 feels roomy to me.

PRO's for RV14:
More spacious for bigger folks. Perhaps a bit easier to build (although you could do a 7 QB kit for less $$ than the 14 slow build). Bigger baggage area for your camping gear etc. And if you build a -14, you have the added benefit of bragging rights because (for now) you will have the latest and greatest out of Vans, and everyone will want to check it out!

I find that as builders, we tend to waaay over-think things. Sometimes you gotta go with your gut. And if your gut is quite prominent, perhaps go with the -14!

If, however, you do decide a 7A is for you, I doubt you will regret out-climbing, out-cruising, and under-spending your 14A wingman. In fact, he could even carry your tent for you!!

Good luck, and let us know what you decide on!

I started building after the -14 was announced. I went with the -7 for the following reasons:

- I helped build and still occasionally fly a -6, so I know the size will work for me and I know the build challenges are manageable.

- I'm saving up and paying as I go, so the lower cost of the -7 (kit and engine) is attractive. I'll probably have the slow-build -7 in the air before I'd have a -14 flying, just due to the time required to generate more money. Or, for the same money and time, I could have a well-equipped -7 vs. a basic -14.

- I like building. In fact, had plans still been available for scratchbuilding a -6, I maybe would have started several years earlier.

Just a note on the fab parts for the 7, don't let that persuade your decision, a lot of the parts that require you to fab up are well explained and drawn to actual size on the paper plans, in most cases, I thought it was fun!

jmcanty3 said:

I find that as builders, we tend to waaay over-think things. Sometimes you gotta go with your gut. And if your gut is quite prominent, perhaps go with the -14!

Click to expand...

Now that's a good one right there.

I've been waffling over the 9 vs 14 ... I'm back at 9 ...

Mostly because of the money ... the price of a 14 just keeps going up ... the price on the finish kit is eye popping! I could do it, but it would be stressful, and I want this to be fun of course ... worrying about money would be no fun.

Also, I could easily build a nicer 9 overall due to the availability of more options, parts, after market add-ons, etc. The platform is overall much more mature, there is much more accumulated knowledge and experience out there. As a first time builder who hasn't built much else in his life, that has major value.

CH 18

Roger,
You may want to check out EAA Chapter 18. Many RV's and builders with experience close to your location.
PM if interested in details.
TS

Now, if we can only talk you into dropping the "A"!

Is the 14 really easier?

+1 on what Bret said. I am mid way through my wings and I have to wonder how they could possibly have made the -14 any easier without taking all the fun out of it.

Also remember that there are a couple of thousand -7s flying, but nobody has yet actually built a -14 fuselage other than Vans. With a -7 there may be a few issues with the manual but they are well known and well documented. I have not had to ask a question yet, a search on VAF has solved every problem I have had. It is hard to beat that kind of accumulated wisdom.

Z-EDD said:

+1 on what Bret said. I am mid way through my wings and I have to wonder how they could possibly have made the -14 any easier without taking all the fun out of it.

Also remember that there are a couple of thousand -7s flying, but nobody has yet actually built a -14 fuselage other than Vans. With a -7 there may be a few issues with the manual but they are well known and well documented. I have not had to ask a question yet, a search on VAF has solved every problem I have had. It is hard to beat that kind of accumulated wisdom.

Click to expand...

Yes, it is easier. No, I do not find that having better designed and fabricated parts takes any fun out of the build.

Several RV-14 builders must be building aluminum canoes in their garages if there are no RV-14 fuselages being built outside of the Vans factory.

The remark concearning the manuals and the fact that the -7 is well documented is comical if you have seen any of the newer plans such as the -10, -12 and -14. There is no need to research the pool of accumulated knowledge when building a -14, just follow the clear and concise instructions step by step.

Just the 14 canopy alone is worth a bunch. The refinements to the 14 over the other kits sounds like the next evolution in Van's kits is here. The 14 gives you the opportunity for a total package build like the 12. I started a 9 (may finish it someday), but once the 12 is built, I'd love a 14!

Of course only Wilbur and Orville probably know where Van's headed next and what awaits our building future.

Bob

I, too, am new to this (this is my 2nd post), and I am evaluating which model would be best for me ... the 7 or the 14.

Is the 14 seen as an eventual replacement for the 7? (like how the 7 was a replacement for the 6, best I can gather)

If so ... how long after the RV-14 taildragger comes out would Van's keep supplying empennages for the RV-7? I see the RV-6 empennage is no longer available ... the same thing would eventually happen with the RV-7. It would be problematic to start in on an RV-7 and then have the empennage be "NLA".

But the pool is HUGE!

Steve, I've thought the same.....what if....Van's goes under, like a zillion other kit manufacturers.
well, if you were taking the usual 5.83 years to build a kit, say a -7,
I'd say you'd have a LOT of half built tail kits still out there.
RV7 - 4,119 kits shipped = 1,209 completed to date ( 2012 estimate)

heck, you can buy a new empennage for a BD-5, ( on eBay) even tho it was last in production in 1975....just because they shipped about 5,000 of them, and they are still hanging in garages around the world!
the -6 emp was discontinued thru a design revision, the -7 improved spin recovery, so became the defacto standard 'bolt-on'.

plus, you 'start' on the empennage, so you'd have that covered. ...and Lots of aftermarket parts. ...more than any other kitplane.
Can't get a cowl, or wheelpants? the market gives you choices like the Sam James versions.

Arizona Aviator said:

If so ... how long after the RV-14 taildragger comes out would Van's keep supplying empennages for the RV-7?

Click to expand...

The RV-7 design was basically doing a bit of modernizing and updating of an already great airplane (RV-6, still the most popular kit ever sold) so that is why the RV-6 was phased out.... the RV-7 is largely the same airplane.

The RV-14 is a side by side 2 seat approved for aerobatics, but other than that, it is a very different airplane. The RV-7 will likely always be available as long as there is market demand, which I think it will always have since it is a bit more of the economy kit when compared to the RV-14.

flyboy1963 said:

the -6 emp was discontinued thru a design revision, the -7 improved spin recovery, so became the defacto standard 'bolt-on'.

Click to expand...

The RV-7 is not promoted as having a better spin recovery than the RV-6.
They RV-7 with the updated tail, has ~ the same spin recover as an RV-6 with an RV-6 tail.

Quickbuild premium

Mike H said:

Yes, it is easier. No, I do not find that having better designed and fabricated parts takes any fun out of the build.

Several RV-14 builders must be building aluminum canoes in their garages if there are no RV-14 fuselages being built outside of the Vans factory.

The remark concearning the manuals and the fact that the -7 is well documented is comical if you have seen any of the newer plans such as the -10, -12 and -14. There is no need to research the pool of accumulated knowledge when building a -14, just follow the clear and concise instructions step by step.

Click to expand...

If the 14 is easier to build than the 7, wouldn't one expect the Quickbuild premium for the 14 to be less than the 7? However, that is not the case, the 14 Quickbuild premium is $1400 more than the 7. Just an observation.

My -7 airframe structure is basically finished. While building, I spent almost as much time searching for parts and correlating the instructions to the plans sheets as I did building. And while I won't claim to be the sharpest knife in the drawer, I'm not dull, and I had prior experience with other homebuilts and actual projects (including a Bushby Mustang II).

By far the worst thing for me was the parts list & random 'organization' of the parts themselves. The -7 kit I received had a paper parts list, with parts in an order that could have made sense only to the guy pulling parts off the shelf at the warehouse. Completely random list, with raw material stock mixed with pre-formed parts, hardware, etc, with no order at all by section of the kit, number, or alpha characters. Same exact hardware numbers come in who knows how many different bags. Some bags have as many as 6 or 8 different hardware types in the same bag, often of nearly identical sizes. I, along with *many* others, begged the factory to make available a 'soft' copy of the parts list, so I could at least sort it myself. The answer was that they didn't know how to get the file out of the computer; it wasn't compatible with computers out in the real world. Note that even the .pdf files they now sell on disc are .pdf's in name only; they're basically photocopies of the paper documents. They are not searchable.

The -7 really is a good kit, but could have had documentation that was several orders of magnitude better than it was (is?).

I haven't seen the -14 plans, but I hear that they are set up like the -10, with instructions printed on the same sheet as the drawings they refer to. That would have been a great improvement for me. I hope they made the same kind of improvements in the parts list, and include a searchable 'soft' copy.

The -14 wasn't available when I started my kit. I'm not a very big guy, especially in this supersized age (5'9, 155 soaking wet), but I'd still have picked the -14 if I could have afforded it. Most of the guys (and a lot of the women) that I know *are* supersized these days, and just don't fit well in a -4/-6/-7/-9. And on a long cross-country, the extra room would be welcome, even to smaller people like me and my spouse.

Charlie

rv7charlie said:

The -7 really is a good kit, but could have had documentation that was several orders of magnitude better than it was (is?).

Click to expand...

The documentation for the -6/6A was really good:

Step one: Build the wings.
Step two: Now that the wings are built, build the fuselage.

rv7charlie said:

<snip>
The -7 really is a good kit, but could have had documentation that was several orders of magnitude better than it was (is?).
<snip>

Click to expand...

The 14 instructions are light years ahead of the 7. Yes - LIGHTYEARS!

Or you could think 8 and buy Smokey!