VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

- POSTING RULES
- Donate yearly (please).
- Advertise in here!

- Today's Posts | Insert Pics


Go Back   VAF Forums > Model Specific > RV-10
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01-05-2010, 08:40 PM
mcsteatlh mcsteatlh is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Kingwood
Posts: 80
Default An apples to oranges comparison

I know the RV-10 and Mooney 201 ('94) is not a direct comparison in the slightest, but I am very drawn toward the Mooney's efficiency in the air. Shoulder and head room arguments removed, how does the 10's numbers stack up against normal real-world Mooney numbers? Anybody have a yardstick?

Thanks
David
(looking for comparisons, not flames
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-05-2010, 09:16 PM
LuisR LuisR is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: St Lucie County, FL
Posts: 353
Default

I really love the look of the Mooney. If I was not about to build, the Mooney would be the one I would buy. What really draws me back though is having to foot those large maintenance bills done by Joe Shmow because he has the "A&P" paper in the wallet.

If I can do my own maintenance (100%) on a Mooney, then I'd have one. Love those machines. I think the closest plane to resemble the Mooney is the Lancair 2 seater. A 2 seater doesn't meat the family mission. Lancair's 4 seater is 250K+!!!!

Mooney has some speed at great economy. An early model can be had for 40k, but it's 30 years old. Thats okay, I'll build.
__________________
Regards
Luis
---------------------------RV-10---------------------------
Empennage. Complete Minus fiberglass and attach section. FOR SALE
Build Log N925LC (Reserved) YouTube
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-06-2010, 05:34 AM
pierre smith's Avatar
pierre smith pierre smith is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Louisville, Ga
Posts: 7,806
Default David....so far....

...no other certified single, retractable or otherwise, has outrun a -10. They've outrun Bonanza's, Cessna 210's, Mooneys of all sorts, Comanches and Cirri....maybe not the newer, cleaner Cirrus, but I'd love to give it a try.

Best,
__________________
Pierre Smith
RV-10, 510 TT
RV6A (Sojourner) 180 HP, Catto 3 Bl (502Hrs), gone...and already missed
Air Tractor AT 502B PT 6-15
Air Tractor 402 PT-6-20
EAA Flight Advisor/CFI/Tech Counselor
Louisville, Ga

It's never skill or craftsmanship that completes airplanes, it's the will to do so,
Patrick Kenny, EAA 275132


Dues gladly paid!
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01-06-2010, 06:41 AM
mburch's Avatar
mburch mburch is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Northwestern USA
Posts: 1,170
Default

Last month I ferried an RV-10 from our location back to its owner. Another pilot followed me down in one of the company Mooneys, a 2001 Ovation. Along the way we were comparing true airspeeds, and I remember that the RV-10 was slightly slower, by 5 knots or less. However, this RV-10 has a composite prop, which is known for smoothness but not for top-end speed. Not to mention, I wasn't exactly flogging the RV. I imagine with a Hartzell up front, the RV-10 would have easily run right with the Ovation, and maybe even beaten it.

Of course, on the trip back in the Mooney, I was already missing the takeoff performance, interior room, and cockpit visibility of the RV-10! I want one.

mcb
__________________
Matt Burch
RV-7 (last 90%)
http://www.rv7blog.com
VAF #836
For organizational convenience I have disabled private messaging, but please feel free to contact me by email.
Please note that any opinions expressed in this message are my own and not those of my employer.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-06-2010, 10:10 AM
kasTX kasTX is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 36
Default

Quote:
...no other certified single, retractable or otherwise, has outrun a -10.


RV-10 183 kts (260HP per Vans)
Ovation 2GX 191 kts (+8 kts)
Ovation 3 197 kts (+14 kts)
Acclaim Type S 242 kts (+59 kts)
350 Corvalis 191 kts (+8 kts)
400 Corvalis TT 235 kts (+52 kts)
Cirrus 22 Turbo 219 kts (+36 kts)

If you really want a fast single, Grumman made a couple of civilian Bearcats (G-58A). Not sure where you can find one though.

Last edited by kasTX : 01-06-2010 at 10:15 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-06-2010, 10:36 AM
db1yg's Avatar
db1yg db1yg is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 598
Default

Hi David,

I had an M20J (201) for 12 years. It was a 1978 which I had upgraded to the 1996 MSE level with the appropriate fairings/speed mods etc. It would do 158 to 162 ktas at 8k density whenever you needed it--and I flew it like that all the time--wide open throttle and around 2500 rpm was its sweet spot.

It could not, however, compete with the RV10 for top speed/roominess/or load hauling ability--although with the 200hp Lyc it did burn less fuel than the 6 banger Lyc in the RV10. For two people and a lot of baggage it was great, for three and some baggage still good, for four people I could not fill the tanks--although the darn thing held 66 gallons (I could not sit in it that long)!!

My 180 hp RV9a with its fp Catto prop out performs my old Mooney in every category except being able to haul four souls. Looking at my log books over the 12 years that I owned it, I had 4 in it maybe 5 times!

As mentioned, it is a high performance retrac, and as such the maintenance is substantially more than it would be with a 10 EVEN if you had to take your home built to a certified mechanic--if you build the RV10 yourself there is no comparison.

The Mooney is a beautiful/strong airframe and if you could spring for the normally aspirated Ovation 3 you would have a cross country flyer capable of 190+ ktas--but be prepared for significant $ at annual time.

If you have the time and ability--build the RV10!!!

Hope this is of value.

Cheers,

db
__________________
Dave B.
RV9a/ECiIO360/James Cowl/WW RV200 Prop
Flying since 3/06 and still smiling!!!
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-06-2010, 12:17 PM
the_other_dougreeves the_other_dougreeves is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Dallas, TX (ADS)
Posts: 2,180
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pierre smith View Post
...no other certified single, retractable or otherwise, has outrun a -10. They've outrun Bonanza's, Cessna 210's, Mooneys of all sorts, Comanches and Cirri....maybe not the newer, cleaner Cirrus, but I'd love to give it a try.
I'm sure you mean "piston single", right? Pretty sure most of the modern production turbine singles (TBM, Meridian/JetProp, PC-12) would stomp the -10. And although it's not "certified", there's the L-39

If we're talking piston singles, I'd think the Mooney Acclaim (M20TN) could do it. The Columbia 400 would be close - the POH claims 182kt TAS at ISA, SL and 204kt TAS at 10k ISA.

However, these beasts are all turbo engines, and the -10 is NA, at least per Van's. Where the -10 beats the pants off all of them is in efficiency.

TODR
__________________
Doug "The Other Doug Reeves" Reeves
CTSW N621CT - SOLD but not forgotten
Home Bases LBX, BZN
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01-06-2010, 01:02 PM
breister breister is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1,132
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pierre smith View Post
...no other certified single, retractable or otherwise, has outrun a -10. They've outrun Bonanza's, Cessna 210's, Mooneys of all sorts, Comanches and Cirri....maybe not the newer, cleaner Cirrus, but I'd love to give it a try.

Best,
<edit - everyone else beat me...> Despite the fact that a couple of production planes might outrun the 10 by a bit, there is that pesky price issue, and on that the -10 wins hands-down... <end edit>

Of course, there is the Lancair ES - the kit-cousin to the Cessna 300. Again, you will spend quite a bit more money for those precious extra knots.

One to watch that might give the -10 a run for the money from a value perspective is the Ravin 500 (a kit from South Africa modeled after the original Comanche). Kit cost is only a tad more than the -10; speed is advertised as considerably faster; and useful load is an incredible 1700 lbs. Stall speed is a bit higher, but the stubby gear do look up to the task of landing on short/grass runways. Adept Airmotive is currently assembling one to test their 320hp turbonormalized engine on, which would make it even faster while saving 100-200 lbs over an IO-540 (of course, their engine might do the same for the -10, but might also propel you right past Vne). The Ravin has plenty of Vne "headroom" compared to the -10 (according to an old email I have from them), so more hp and/or turbos need not cause you to "throttle back."

Even more interesting is that Ravin is currently working on duplicating Piper's evolution of the Comanche to a twin engine version. How about a pair of IO-390's anyone? Or, a pair of DeltaHawk 200hp Diesels for a 2,000 mile range? Oh, my poor bladder - but with 400hp for climb and the ability to throttle back to 5gph/engine, with such an airplane you could easily cross either pond.

By the way, you COULD build a Ravin with a single DeltaHawk. Apparently they ARE delivering engines now.

So, there are some options.

BUT (and I fly a plastic airplane) - there is no other community so helpful as the RV community. Just as with individual aircraft components, support is a KEY component of any product. Factor that in accordingly!

Last edited by breister : 01-06-2010 at 01:07 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 01-06-2010, 02:50 PM
xavierm xavierm is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 438
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by breister View Post
One to watch that might give the -10 a run for the money from a value perspective is the Ravin 500 (a kit from South Africa modeled after the original Comanche). Kit cost is only a tad more than the -10;
Ravin 500 Kit Price: $86,995

300 kit varies according to your needs and specifications but rough estimates are between $62,000-$77,000.
__________________
_____________
Xavier
RV-7 build in progress
www.theaviatorx.com
"Genius is persistence in disguise"

Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 01-06-2010, 07:41 PM
ppilotmike's Avatar
ppilotmike ppilotmike is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 1,761
Default Raven ??

So I saw this thread and figured I'd check out the Raven website to see what the deal was. As far as I could see, the Raven is a total glass airplane. Any thoughts?
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:44 PM.


The VAFForums come to you courtesy Delta Romeo, LLC. By viewing and participating in them you agree to build your plane using standardized methods and practices and to fly it safely and in accordance with the laws governing the country you are located in.