What's new
Van's Air Force

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

RV-9A Real World Numbers

KD4JAZ

I'm New Here
If this has already been answered please direct me to the proper link!
I'm 6'4" 250 lbs...Can I fit in a -9a? Also, what are some real world numbers for a -9a at full gross with an IO-320 Hartzell CS for rate of climb and cruise at say 8000 msl? Van's numbers seem optimistic, but hope they are close. I plan on doing some long X/C with the airplane. Haven't made the plunge yet, but hope to within the near future. I'm new to the website and have searched quite a bit to find my answers.

Marc
 
Hi Mark,

A search will pull up lots of threads about this.

But it turns out my co-pilot to OSH in '17 was 6'4" and 250 lb. It was a little snug shoulder-to shoulder, but head room was not an issue. He's pretty average when it comes to torso/leg ratio, but if you have a taller torso, it could be a problem. I'm 6'3", 200 lb., and I can put a fist between my headset and the canopy.

Anti-Splat Aero makes what it calls the "Almost a -14" kit that allows a more reclined seating position to gain more head room, but I found that putting the seatback bottom on the middle hinge and tilting it all the way back to the stock crossbar was perfect for me.

I found Van's performance specs to be quite accurate. I've got a FP Catto prop and a 160-hp IO-320-D1A, and it cruises at about 155 KTAS at 2700 rpm, with a fuel burn of 7.5-8.0 gph, running LOP.
 
9A numbers

The fit question can only be answered by trying a couple planes on for size. Either the 7A or 9A will work for that. The variables are the seat and rudder pedal location, cushion thickness and your own personal upper/lower body geometry. You may be a great candidate for the ?Almost a 14 Seat Back Mod?.
I?m only familiar with the performance of 1 RV-9A, it a typical build and has the 160 hp IO320 and Hartzell CS prop. At 7-8000? 24x24 it will true close to 155kts. Gross weight climb rate is healthy. This week I saw about 1100 fpm with 400 lbs in the seats, almost full fuel, close to sea level & 70 deg F.

Don Broussard
RV9 Rebuild in Progress
57 Pacer
 
I have a 9a and am right at 6 4, 250. Rudder pedals are forward of plans, almost 14 mod but found it reclines too far for good sight picture to land. Shoulders slightly snug but not really an issue even with similar size passengers.
 
Real world data for my RV-9A (160HP IO-320, Fixed pitch prop, not CS) from my trip this week to/from SoCal to AZ:

  • Altitude 9500'
  • TAS 147Kts
  • Fuel Flow 6.6 Gph (LOP cruise)
  • RPM 2470
  • Full Fuel, two passengers and baggage, we climb out on take off at 1000'/min and then with the autopilot on it likes to slow that climb to 500'/min.
I upload my flight data to Savvy Analysis, so here's a link if you want to poke around and look at other parameters.

I'm 6'2" and 190, and the cabin is comfortable for me with the seat all the way back and pedals all the way forward. If you need more width/height, then I would seriously consider the RV-14 with its extra cabin space.
 
Thanks for the quick replies guys...?..I live in the Orlando area so I'm going to try to make it to Lakeland for Sun n Fun this year and hopefully try to sit in several models if possible.
 
Same as Bruce

I'm 6' even and an embarrassing 280#.
My numbers are essentially the same as Bruce however, when we get these nice little cold fronts I can get 2000'/min at 90kts in the cool dense air.
Great cruiser when at or above 8500'. If you aren't interested in acro the 9 (IMHO) is the best choice.

There's two of us in adjacent hangars at ZPH if you're interested in driving over for a look see.
 
I have an IO360 and a catto fixed pitch prop. I can climb out at 110 knots getting 7-800 fpm. If I push it hard I can get a whole lot more at 90 knots. Like 1300-1500 depending on the air. I usually cruise at 9500 feet, 155 knots on 7 gallons per hour lean of peak. Its really happy up high. I have achieved some epic numbers at 15-16k feet. It climbed up that high pretty easily as well. I am 5'11 230 and took my buddy up who is 6'4 270. Should to shoulder it was snug, but we had room for sure. I'm not into acro, the nine is an epic cross country machine!
 
I have an IO360 and a catto fixed pitch prop. I can climb out at 110 knots getting 7-800 fpm. If I push it hard I can get a whole lot more at 90 knots. Like 1300-1500 depending on the air. I usually cruise at 9500 feet, 155 knots on 7 gallons per hour lean of peak. Its really happy up high. I have achieved some epic numbers at 15-16k feet. It climbed up that high pretty easily as well. I am 5'11 230 and took my buddy up who is 6'4 270. Should to shoulder it was snug, but we had room for sure. I'm not into acro, the nine is an epic cross country machine!


Pete,
Not sure it is a typo or what, but 800 fpm with an IO360 seems a bit anemic.

Marc
 
I have an IO360 and a catto fixed pitch prop. I can climb out at 110 knots getting 7-800 fpm. If I push it hard I can get a whole lot more at 90 knots. Like 1300-1500 depending on the air. I usually cruise at 9500 feet, 155 knots on 7 gallons per hour lean of peak. Its really happy up high. I have achieved some epic numbers at 15-16k feet. It climbed up that high pretty easily as well. I am 5'11 230 and took my buddy up who is 6'4 270. Should to shoulder it was snug, but we had room for sure. I'm not into acro, the nine is an epic cross country machine!

Pete,
Not sure it is a typo or what, but 800 fpm with an IO360 seems a bit anemic.

Marc

Depending on the OAT's, with a fixed pitch prop, that might be a good number.
 
Real world data for my RV-9A (160HP O-320, Catto 3 blade):

Altitude 7500' DA
TAS 141Kts
Fuel Flow 7.7 Gph (cyl #1/3 set 50 ROP cruise...can't go LOP with carb)
RPM 2,450
Full Fuel, two men (185/190#) and 30# baggage
 
Okay, stupid question. Go ahead and flame me. My Nomex CAP flightsuit is zipped up....

How are these planes so fast? The numbers above are amazing to me. I?ve flow 172s, 182s, etc with similar horsepower that aren?t within 30 kts of the numbers cited above. It is simply streamlining? If so, why has?t Cessna figured that out in the last 50 years?
 
No Flaming here, but I believe Cessna DOES have it figured out. There are trade offs for everything and Cessna builds an airplane for a different mission. Look at the C172. It may have the same engine, but it also has 800 lbs more gross weight, a much bigger cabin, an upright seating position that you get into like a pickup truck, and a super robust landing gear that literally generations of flight students can slam into the runway over and over. All that stuff has a huge up side for average joe pilot or a flight school, but it comes at a performance cost.

Beech also has this figured out. The Bonanza has basically the same cockpit dimensions as an RV7, and is very aerodynamically clean, but all that "slickness" takes a lot of labor hours to produce compared to a simpler design, and the market just isn't as big for an airplane like that, which are a couple of reasons that new ones are pushing a million dollars.
 
Steve,
What is the TAS at those settings and altitude?
Alex

11,500 ft and 135 kts TAS. you can fly a long time and the engine is loafing along. engine oil looks new when I change it.
 
Last edited:
No Flaming here, but I believe Cessna DOES have it figured out. There are trade offs for everything and Cessna builds an airplane for a different mission. Look at the C172. It may have the same engine, but it also has 800 lbs more gross weight, a much bigger cabin, an upright seating position that you get into like a pickup truck, and a super robust landing gear that literally generations of flight students can slam into the runway over and over. All that stuff has a huge up side for average joe pilot or a flight school, but it comes at a performance cost.

Beech also has this figured out. The Bonanza has basically the same cockpit dimensions as an RV7, and is very aerodynamically clean, but all that "slickness" takes a lot of labor hours to produce compared to a simpler design, and the market just isn't as big for an airplane like that, which are a couple of reasons that new ones are pushing a million dollars.


Other than getting in to the bucket that is our airplanes, I completely disagree with you.

The seating position in an RV is upright and more comfortable. Unlike a Bonanza, the cabin doesn't curve inward, forcing you to sit at an uncomfortable angle.

As for the OP's question, these are real world numbers from my O-360 powered -9. It climbed at 500 FPM from sea level until it pushed over at 17.6 DA while covering some ground.

KLVJ+to+SC86.jpg
 
Last edited:
Results from two recent flights.
I have a 9 with O-360 and Catto 3 blade.
All speeds are mph
119 TAS 113 IAS
1550 FPM climb
26.4 MAP 2260 RPM
49F temp
3100 feet climbing

Flight 2
Level at 4000?
8.0 gph
20.7 MAP 2490 RPM
177 TAS 159 IAS
 
...Other than getting in to the bucket that is our airplanes, I completely disagree with you...

Wait...two people on the internet have disagreed in a civilized and logical manner while both stating objective points clearly? Nobody got called a name or otherwise insulted? I'll have to check the new testament, but I'm pretty sure that this is in Revelation as one of the signs of the end times :)
 
Wait...two people on the internet have disagreed in a civilized and logical manner while both stating objective points clearly? Nobody got called a name or otherwise insulted? I'll have to check the new testament, but I'm pretty sure that this is in Revelation as one of the signs of the end times :)

but wait, there is still time to remedy this. while Bill R, with his high HP motor, descends for a landing to wrestle some fuel hose snake, I sail on by to my final destination on a 700 mile trip burning 5.7 gph, sipping on my caramel latte.
 
Last edited:
but wait, there is still time to remedy this. while Bill R, with his high HP motor, descends for a landing to wrestle some fuel hose snake, I sail on by to my final destination on a 700 mile trip burning 5.7 gph, sipping on my caramel latte.

Ah, but you assume, incorrectly, that I am using all that power to drink fuel and go fast, when in reality, I am flying at the same TAS speed as you, LOP, burning less fuel while drinking hot cocoa, looking down on you because I have used my extra power to climb higher and faster where I caught tailwinds that would easily put me in the 200 knot club. ;)
 
Last edited:
RV9A Real World Numbers

I have a 9A with an O-320 with 9.5 to 1 pistons / port and polished. A bit higher HP.

Typical TAS at 8,000 ft - 2450 RPM is 160 knots with a 3 bladed Catto. Climb is around 1000 FPM loaded - better with a lighter load.

I am also 6'4" - 270 lb and fit comfortably in the 9A. Rudder pedals pushed forward as far as possible and throttle controls in lower part of the panel - not below.

I use a Clarity Aloft headset to avoid hitting the canopy - works fine. Its a cross country animal........:cool:
 
but wait, there is still time to remedy this. while Bill R, with his high HP motor, descends for a landing to wrestle some fuel hose snake, I sail on by to my final destination on a 700 mile trip burning 5.7 gph, sipping on my caramel latte.

Ahhh, you silly little people with all your frequent fuel stops. You amuse me... :D
 
Ahhh, you silly little people with all your frequent fuel stops. You amuse me... :D

ah yes, but I don't have to use "all" of my popsicle money to fill my tanks. that means I can continue sailing on by you while holding a dreamsicle.
 
Last edited:
My experience

Whether you fit is going to depend somewhat on your body geometry -- seated height, etc. So I think you'll want to try one on. You're welcome to try mine if you're in the area sometime (W96).

I flew my -9A at pretty much full gross to and from OSH this year and paid attention to settings and performance. I've got a carbureted O-320 with the Hartzell CS. One lightspeed and one conventional mag.

Basically, I was getting 158kts TAS at 8,000 feet burning just under 8 gph. This is pretty close to Vans' published numbers.

From talking to other RV-9 owners I've concluded that Vans' published numbers are pretty realistic.

I didn't pay much attention to my climb numbers. In general the -9 with an O-320 is a very, very good climber; with an O-360 it's presumably even better. The CS probably helps but I suspect it's a homesick angel with a FP as well.

Assuming you fit in it, and assuming you don't need to carry particularly bulky or heavy luggage, the RV-9 is an absolutely superb cross-country machine, and amazingly efficient. That's the kind of flying I often do, and I cannot begin to tell you how much I love mine.

If this has already been answered please direct me to the proper link!
I'm 6'4" 250 lbs...Can I fit in a -9a? Also, what are some real world numbers for a -9a at full gross with an IO-320 Hartzell CS for rate of climb and cruise at say 8000 msl? Van's numbers seem optimistic, but hope they are close. I plan on doing some long X/C with the airplane. Haven't made the plunge yet, but hope to within the near future. I'm new to the website and have searched quite a bit to find my answers.

Marc
 
Last edited:
ah yes, but I don't have to use "all" of my popsicle money to fill my tanks. that means I can continue sailing on by you while holding a dreamsicle.

Admittedly I'm a bit of an anomaly both with my large tanks and my fuel system - but I've got 67 gallons wing capacity and I'm running 91E10 - so I'm buying my fuel in bulk at Sams Club and hauling the tank to my private strip. My last load of fuel was purchased last week for $2.31 per gallon. So I'll put my economy up against anyone in terms of miles per dollar.

The 67 gallon wing capacity lets me get to most of my destinations and back again without buying 100LL on the road.
 
Last edited:
Admittedly I'm a bit of an anomaly both with my large tanks and my fuel system - but I've got 67 gallons wing capacity and I'm running 91E10 - so I'm buying my fuel in bulk at Sams Club and hauling the tank to my private strip. My last load of fuel was purchased last week for $2.31 per gallon. So I'll put my economy up against anyone in terms of miles per dollar.

The 67 gallon wing capacity lets me get to most of my destinations and back again without buying 100LL on the road.

And we appreciate you paying road tax on your fuel but are disappointed you aren't contributing your fair share to support ATC and the FAA. ;)
 
And we appreciate you paying road tax on your fuel but are disappointed you aren't contributing your fair share to support ATC and the FAA. ;)

This is a first on the forum. It appears you are "fuel shaming" him for not using 100LL and using auto fuel. ;)
 
Last edited:
This is a first on the forum. It appears you are "fuel shaming" him for not using 100LL and using auto fuel. ;)

No different than a Tesla owner not paying road taxes.
Seriously, Greg and I are friends and poke each other, when we get a chance.
 
9A, 0 320, 9:1 pistons one EI and Slick mag, Hartzell CS prop and carb.
8,000 to 10,000 feet, full throttle, 2,270 rpm and leaned manually to rough then in till just smooth:
Typically 150 to 153 kt TAS (sometimes 155 kt for no apparent reason?) @ 26 l/h (6.8 to 6.9 US gal).

Fin 9A.
 
No different than a Tesla owner not paying road taxes.
Seriously, Greg and I are friends and poke each other, when we get a chance.

Yep, Bill just loves spreading all that lead out of his exhaust on the schoolkids... :cool:
 
Back
Top