What's new
Van's Air Force

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

Which RV to buy? Help me organize my thoughts.

T

totoro001

Member
Hey all, first let me say that you all have an awesome place here. I've been lurking for a while and plan to purchase an rv kit early 2013. I'm just having a hard time deciding which is right for me and was hoping you might be able to assist and shed some light on it.

"What is your mission" I'm sure would be the first thing some may ask. Quick and economical cross country flying in a sporty and attractive aircraft. I'm not one for aerobatics, and burning 10 gallons per hour doesn't appeal to me all that much. To me that leaves a couple aircraft to choose from. Mainly the -4, -6, or (the most obvious choice) the -9. I really don't care if it's tandem or side by side seating, nor do I care that much about storage space. If I can fit a small tent and a weekend worth of clothes, that's all I need.

From my calculations the -4 (with a 150) and the -9 (with a 135) get similar 'gas mileage'. While the 4 and 6 have aerobatic capabilities, though that doesn't mean that I have to do aerobatics. I don't plan to fly ifr nor to go above fl180.

Logic tells me that the 9 is the right choice because it's purpose is cross country flight, but why not the 4? It's quick, attractive, fun. It just happens to be more aerobatically enclined.

Help me out guys, what are your thoughts?
 
Last edited:
One seat or two? If two that rules out the -3.

My opinion is forget the smaller engine for any RV. It is not in your best interest performance wise or for resale.

You can pull that black knob back and be equivalent to fuel consumption of any lower horsepower engine.

I have a 6A and have been to 47 of 48 CONUS states, Mexico, Bahamas and the Caymans. So it is not bad as a cross-country plane. Get a two axis autopilot may be more important than whether it is a 6,7,8 or 9.
 
Last edited:
First, this is from a guy who is still building and has never seen a completed 3. I went through the same questions you are, just like everyone else here. I had many of the same "wants" as you, but I wanted a passenger sitting next to me since it will be my wife and she is pretty! She did insist on an A model, so I guess it evens out.

We wanted a plane for a low time pilot that was stable, reasonably quick, and could get us over the mountains where we live. I also didn't want to spend a bunch of money each year paying an AP to do things I could do myself. I don't have a desire to go upside down, so that made my choice pretty easy. I am building a 9A - just getting ready to hang the engine. I have flown in a few 9A's and they are just what I am looking for. I don't know anyone with the 135hp engine, but I have seen posts about them so I am sure they perform as specified. I wanted a O-360, but found a deal I couldn't pass up for the 160hp O-320. I wanted more hp because of the altitudes here in the mountains, but both of the 9A's I have flown in here had the 320 and were great, so I am satisfied.

One thing I have learned is the hp isn't as important as how the engine is flown. The 180 hp and the 160 hp will burn about the same fuel at the same speed. I would suggest you find someone in your area that will give you a ride. RV pilots are always looking to show off their planes and love to give demo rides. Good luck with your search and don't rush it. There are some very nice ships out there for sale.
 
Shoot guys I'm sorry, I meant the 4 not the 3. Thanks for the replies so far. I like the idea of having a 2 axis ap for the longer trips, and will factor in the price for the larger engines. It sounds like it doesn't really matter which one I choose as they're all great planes.
 
totoro001 said:
Shoot guys I'm sorry, I meant the 4 not the 3. Thanks for the replies so far. I like the idea of having a 2 axis ap for the longer trips, and will factor in the price for the larger engines. It sounds like it doesn't really matter which one I choose as they're all great planes.
Click to expand...

I don't know your dimensions, but if you're tall you might want to find an RV-4 and sit in it. I'm 6'1" and I'm slender, but I found the 4 that I sat in quite cramped for my taste. The canopy almost touched my head. The other models have more room inside, both for you and for your baggage if you travel. Nothing wrong with any RV, though. You're right... they're all great airplanes!
 
While I'm only 5'10", all of my height is in my upper body so I'll check locally and see if I can find one to sit in. Thanks for the heads up (that's almost a pun)!
 
If you like quick, responsive flight with very high roll rates...go with the 4. If you like solid, stable flight with slightly slower roll rates go with the 9. Based on your first post I think the 9 is the correct plane for you. Don't let anyone tell you what size engine you should put in it. The 9 was designed for a smaller motor and flies just fine with it. However, as one poster mentioned, you will have a more difficult time selling it with the smaller motor. If you put in a brand new motor the price difference between the smaller engine and the O-320 is negligible so why not put a bigger engine in?
I have flown both of these fine aircraft but they are designed for entirely different purposes. The 4 is for adrenaline pumping, yank and bank, aerobatic flight while the 9 is for cross country. I chose the 9 because it was still very fun to fly, very nimble but much less "twitchy" then the aerobatic models. I don't like the word twitchy but its the only one I can think of for fast roll rate planes.
Good luck in your choice...you can't go wrong with either plane.
 
B Cunningham said:
Or will you take passengers ? If so, the side by side models rule...
Click to expand...
+1. If you plan to take passengers on those long trips, they will definitely appreciate the side-by-side seating. I find that for longer trips, even solo, having the empty seat beside me is more convenient for getting a map open when I need it. In the -4 you'll definitely want a moving map GPS instead... There isn't a lot of room to open a sectional without totally losing your altitude and attitude. :)

As for -6 vs. -9, I guess you'll have to decide how much you want to pay. There are more -6's available on the used market, because there are a lot more of them around... That tends to drive the price down a bit. And with a -6, at least you have the *option* of aerobatics, if you want to, later on. The -9 is just as nice to fly, and *is* more efficient. Whether you could realise significant dollars on fuel savings over the course of a trip I don't know... Throttling back in a -6 is pretty efficient too.

Oh, and while i've used the -6 and -9, note that i'm referring to the type, not specifically to the nose/tail wheel versions... That's a whole other discussion... :)
 
Phil welcome! Building airplane is a huge multi year endeavor. People sometimes change several wives during the process. :) Buy yourself a nice RV6(A) and enjoy flying. It's buyers market.
 
aarvig said:
If you like quick, responsive flight with very high roll rates...go with the 4. If you like solid, stable flight with slightly slower roll rates go with the 9. Based on your first post I think the 9 is the correct plane for you. Don't let anyone tell you what size engine you should put in it. The 9 was designed for a smaller motor and flies just fine with it. However, as one poster mentioned, you will have a more difficult time selling it with the smaller motor. If you put in a brand new motor the price difference between the smaller engine and the O-320 is negligible so why not put a bigger engine in?
I have flown both of these fine aircraft but they are designed for entirely different purposes. The 4 is for adrenaline pumping, yank and bank, aerobatic flight while the 9 is for cross country. I chose the 9 because it was still very fun to fly, very nimble but much less "twitchy" then the aerobatic models. I don't like the word twitchy but its the only one I can think of for fast roll rate planes.
Good luck in your choice...you can't go wrong with either plane.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the advice aarvig, when I think with my 'logical' brain, the 9 does make more sense. As for engines, I'll probably get a mid-time used engine and make sure it's solid. While I'd love to pretend like I've got a steak and potatos budget, most of the time it's closer to mac-n-cheese.

diamond said:
Phil
I'm curious why you didn't mention the RV14 as an option.
Click to expand...

Mainly because of the cost. Larger engine = more $$ in gas, maintenance, etc. It's not that much faster, and while it does have more room, for my 'mission' it's unnecessary. Thanks for the heads up though :)

Snowflake said:
+1. If you plan to take passengers on those long trips, they will definitely appreciate the side-by-side seating. I find that for longer trips, even solo, having the empty seat beside me is more convenient for getting a map open when I need it. In the -4 you'll definitely want a moving map GPS instead... There isn't a lot of room to open a sectional without totally losing your altitude and attitude. :)

As for -6 vs. -9, I guess you'll have to decide how much you want to pay. There are more -6's available on the used market, because there are a lot more of them around... That tends to drive the price down a bit. And with a -6, at least you have the *option* of aerobatics, if you want to, later on. The -9 is just as nice to fly, and *is* more efficient. Whether you could realise significant dollars on fuel savings over the course of a trip I don't know... Throttling back in a -6 is pretty efficient too.

Oh, and while i've used the -6 and -9, note that i'm referring to the type, not specifically to the nose/tail wheel versions... That's a whole other discussion... :)
Click to expand...

You make a good point. If I wanted some place to put some things and have them within easy reach, the 4 would be the wrong choice (o2 can, charts, snacks, etc). The side by side models would also give me more panel room. It would also be handy if I ever decide to get my CFI and teach my significant other to fly.

Thanks everyone for your help so far! You're really helping me narrow things down. I'm starting to feel that because my mission is more cross country flying, that the -6 or -9 would be better choices. I'll have to do some more research.
 
Since you stated you intend to build instead of buy a flying aircraft, you will find the RV-9A kit to be far more refined than the RV-4. Pre-punched holes, jigless construction, and CAD drawings and instructions make the RV-9A a much easier plane to build than the -4. The RV-4 is a fantastic aircraft, but the RV-9A kit is RV state-of-the-art.

Enjoy your project!
 
Last edited:
Buy what you want. Build what you want.

I bought an RV-8 with a smaller engine. Love it. If I were to build, I'd build an RV-9.

To paraphrase an other VAF member - buy/build what you want, not what others want you to.
 
Vlad said:
Phil welcome! Building airplane is a huge multi year endeavor. People sometimes change several wives during the process. :) Buy yourself a nice RV6(A) and enjoy flying. It's buyers market.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the tip Vlad, though I'd really like to get my hands dirty and build something. I fear that may rule out the 6 unless I got an amazing deal on one. I will say that for someone like you (renouned RV9 owner/flyer) to recommend an rv6, that means something.

Sam Buchanan said:
Since you stated you intend to build instead of buy a flying aircraft, you will find the RV-9A kit to be far more refined than the RV-4. Pre-punched holes, jigless construction, and CAD drawings and instructions make the RV-9A a much easier plane to build than the -4. The RV-4 is a fantastic aircraft, but the RV-9A kit is RV state-of-the-art.

Enjoy your project!
Click to expand...

Good point Sam. It would save me the trouble of having to drill everything and manufacture a million little jigs.

humptybump said:
Buy what you want. Build what you want.

I bought an RV-8 with a smaller engine. Love it. If I were to build, I'd build an RV-9.

To paraphrase an other VAF member - buy/build what you want, not what others want you to.
Click to expand...

Thanks Humpty :)
 
totoro001 said:
Good point Sam. It would save me the trouble of having to drill everything and manufacture a million little jigs.
Click to expand...

Don't let "jigs" scare you. I used to hate jigs. The jigs for the RV, (There's only 2 necessary, one for the fuselage and one for the wings.), are the simplest construction you can imagine.
I redesigned and built 2 fuselage jigs in a 3-day weekend.
 
totoro001 said:
Thanks for the tip Vlad, though I'd really like to get my hands dirty and build something. I fear that may rule out the 6 unless I got an amazing deal on one. I will say that for someone like you (renouned RV9 owner/flyer) to recommend an rv6, that means something.

You got key phrase there Phil ... unless I got an amazing deal.... You will get many votes to build the 9 no need for mine but I think you are very busy man with no spare time. Look for that amazing deal get yourself nice flying RV and then build your dream plane if you wish.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
I might be wrong here but I don't think Vlad is reccomending the 6 over the 9 , it's just he expects a better deal (cheaper) on a used 6 than the newer versioned 9. I know he loves his 9A.
Correct me if I'm wrong Vlad.
 
Still not sure?

When I was in your shoes, I spent the money and took the time to visit the factory. Flew and took the factory tour. That may well help you finalize your choice. If you decide to do this, then check with the factory for aircraft availability and the local weather. Good luck, you really can't go wrong.
 
Vlad said:
Phil welcome! Building airplane is a huge multi year endeavor. People sometimes change several wives during the process. :) Buy yourself a nice RV6(A) and enjoy flying. It's buyers market.
Click to expand...

The Russian is wise beyond his years!

Nobody builds planes anymore!

:D. CJ
 
Ron B. said:
I might be wrong here but I don't think Vlad is reccomending the 6 over the 9 , it's just he expects a better deal (cheaper) on a used 6 than the newer versioned 9. I know he loves his 9A.
Correct me if I'm wrong Vlad.
Click to expand...


You are right Ron. Nowadays better equipped (then my 9) six could be found for half the price I paid for parts and supplies.

Don't get me wrong Phil I love my 9 and I built it to serve the purpose of long distance travel. I enjoyed buiding the plane tremendously and wouldn't change a thing if started again. Time was money and I had plenty of it (time of course) :)
 
Sam Buchanan said:
Since you stated you intend to build instead of buy a flying aircraft, you will find the RV-9A kit to be far more refined than the RV-4. Pre-punched holes, jigless construction, and CAD drawings and instructions make the RV-9A a much easier plane to build than the -4. The RV-4 is a fantastic aircraft, but the RV-9A kit is RV state-of-the-art.

Enjoy your project!
Click to expand...

I was going to mention the same thing. I'm only 100 hrs into an RV-8 build, but I L-O-V-E the prepunched nature of my kit! I can only imagine how much time it saves having pilot holes located for me, in both time and in ruined & reordered parts.
 
As someone who started with the 135 hp engine in a -9 and changed it out to the 180 hp engine, don't go with the O-290. While it is a GREAT engine and a very good match for the -9, you simply can't get parts for it.

Buy / build a -9 with the O-320. That is more power than you will ever need in this aircraft.

While the -4 is a great airplane, your mission stated you wanted to travel and take camping gear along. If that is the case, any of the side-by-side RV's will work better than the -4. There just isn't a lot of baggage room in the -4.

Also, the -6 is out of production so if you are going to order your tail kit from Van's you have the choice of a -7, -9, or -14.

I suspect, but don't know, that Van's will drop one of the side-by-side models. After all, why have all three in their line-up. In typical Van's fashion, they will continue to support the builders and fliers out there, so parts won't be an issue. If I had to guess, I would say Van's will drop the -7 and keep the -9 because the -14 is an acro bird and the -9 is not. Just guessing here, I have no info to base any of this on so I could be full of it.
 
Sam Buchanan said:
Since you stated you intend to build instead of buy a flying aircraft, you will find the RV-9A kit to be far more refined than the RV-4. Pre-punched holes, jigless construction, and CAD drawings and instructions make the RV-9A a much easier plane to build than the -4. The RV-4 is a fantastic aircraft, but the RV-9A kit is RV state-of-the-art.

Enjoy your project!
Click to expand...

For the sake of discussion: I wonder how much more refined the RV-14 will be compared to the RV-9?

Jim
 
You may not care much but the ladies REALLY do not like being stuck in the back of a tandem plane. And, seriously, consider the -12 very closely! 1st time builder, very meticulous, 950 hours to build with all options. 122kts at 5.0 gph of auto premium. Glass panel, autopilot. 5 hour flyoff, not 25 or 40. You might say its slow, but I can be flying 120,000 miles or about 60 times across the entire U.S. during the minimum extra time you will spend building a different RV. Go check one out!
Bill H. N412BR "Sweetie"
 
Bill_H said:
And, seriously, consider the -12 very closely!
Click to expand...

Ok, let us examine the RV-12 closely

1) Service ceiling 13,800': Not good for the Rockies

2) Cruise speed 131 mph: Not good for cross countries

3) Baggage 50 lbs: Not enough.
 
I just want to point out that not all ladies prefer the side by side option. My wife has little interest in the "flying" part of the plane. She is interested in spending time with me (I am a lucky guy) and getting to the places the plane can take us. We talked about it at length before I dove into the project and selected an RV-8. What attracted her, was that she would have her own "space" in the back seat where she could read, take a nap or whatever without constantly knocking elbows with me. The RV-8 offers more individual space than the side by sides. For me, I like the centerline seating and the overall looks of the plane. For us, we will probably have more time on the plane together for cross country travelling, but I will likely have more trips solo for local hops flying places with other RV friend.

pdj
 
Sam Buchanan said:
Since you stated you intend to build instead of buy a flying aircraft...
Click to expand...
Thanks Sam, I missed that point earlier, so that removes the -6 from the options unless a used kit is sourced.

My comments still stand if you replace -7 where I said -6 however, although even more strongly in favour of the -7. If the choice is -7 or -9, personally I think that's no choice at all... The fuselage is the same, and the tail and wings will be the same amount of work to build either way. Having the *option* of aerobatics down the road would chose the -7 for me.

-7 vs -4 is quite a different mission choice. If you're willing to spring for the -7 you should consider an -8, which would cost about the same as a -7 and give you back a lot of the room you'd give up in a -4.
 
RV-8

pjaffray said:
I just want to point out that not all ladies prefer the side by side option. My wife has little interest in the "flying" part of the plane. She is interested in spending time with me (I am a lucky guy) and getting to the places the plane can take us. We talked about it at length before I dove into the project and selected an RV-8. What attracted her, was that she would have her own "space" in the back seat where she could read, take a nap or whatever without constantly knocking elbows with me. The RV-8 offers more individual space than the side by sides. For me, I like the centerline seating and the overall looks of the plane. For us, we will probably have more time on the plane together for cross country travelling, but I will likely have more trips solo for local hops flying places with other RV friend.

pdj
Click to expand...

I'll also add that the 8 has a greater baggage capacity @ 125 lbs vs 100 for the 7 and 9 (may be limited by gross weight, of course). A lot of stuff can be fit into those two baggage compartments.

Skylor
 
What is the minimum RV-6(A) kit that a person needs to find such that they could still get remaining kits from Vans to finish the plane?

Is the work required to build a -6 that much more compared to later aircraft that the poster should strongly consider a -7, -8 or -9?
 
Ron Lee said:
What is the minimum RV-6(A) kit that a person needs to find such that they could still get remaining kits from Vans to finish the plane?

Is the work required to build a -6 that much more compared to later aircraft that the poster should strongly consider a -7, -8 or -9?
Click to expand...

I believe they still support all of the subkits except the empenage, which is available in parts and pieces only I understand.
I would not say it is much more work, but it is more work. 6's are not match drilled so jigging is required. There is more time in thinking things through as the plans are no where near as nice as they are on the newer kits.
Skins are prepunched for the wing, but that is as much of a hinderance as an advantage. I am not sure if they are supporting any QB's for the 6.
Airframe aside, they are about the same when it comes to the other 10% that takes 90% of your time; Engine, plumbing, wiring, panel, fairings, etc....
 
I don't necessarily have anything against pre-built, and if I could find one like that RV6 that sold recently for 26g I'd jump on it immediately. The draw towards building is that I really enjoy getting my hands dirty and knowing the ins and outs of my plane. The other thing that is appealing is being able to do my own "annual" which (as you guys know) only the original builder or an A&P can do.

If I find another cheap AND quality used <=180hp RV6/7/9 (non-a, possibly with a simple stack that I can upgrade, crappy or no paint, and a mid time engine with good compression numbers) I'll absolutely consider it and make moves accordingly.

I appreciate everyone chiming in to help assist me with my decision! :)
 
Last edited:
My 2 cents....

I purchased a partial RV-7 kit at approximately quickbuild stage. All but the finish kit. I basically paid for the costs of the kits and the builder did a great job. Saved me 800-100 hours of time and left the personal stuff to me.

Soon after I purchased the RV-7 kit, work, kids sports, and building a new house myself, I could find very little time to work on it. Thanks to the "work" I was able to afford a flying RV-6. Decent paint, great steam gauge IFR panel, low time O-360, FP Prop. Planes like this can be found in the 50K to 60K range. Recently been working on installing autopilot, updating interior, etc. Fun stuff.

I love working with my hands, but I love flying more. I feel like I made a great choice. I sold my C172 and my wife and I are having a blast flying the RV-6. Sometimes its difficult to afford the fuel bill and build at the same time, but its all about priorities. I think it is the best decision I have made. I am going to take my time and build the 7 over a 6-8 year time frame and still fly my RV-6. I figure when I am about done with the 7, I can sell the 6 and recoup the cost of the engine and avionics....give or take.

If I were you, I would buy a 6, fly it and that will help you decide what to build. I have zero regrets with my 6. 160 knots at 10 gpm is my kind of traveling.

By the way....I fly off grass, wife had to sit next to me, and I want to go upside down. Therefore a 6 or 7 was it. :D
 
Thanks for your thoughts Geeman. I think that's the route I'm going to go (buy pre-built for a reasonable price). On a side note, I prefer non-paved runways as well.

Thanks again, and fly safe! :)
 
If you're looking for a -6 kit, a guy in my chapter has a complete kit that he never started. He told me he was thinking of donating it to a local community college for the tax write off, so it could likely be had pretty cheaply, but I never discussed price with him as we opted for an -8 instead. If you're interested let me know, and I'll put you in touch with him.
 
Nihon_Ni said:
If you're looking for a -6 kit, a guy in my chapter has a complete kit that he never started. He told me he was thinking of donating it to a local community college for the tax write off, so it could likely be had pretty cheaply, but I never discussed price with him as we opted for an -8 instead. If you're interested let me know, and I'll put you in touch with him.
Click to expand...

I'd love to get his contact info, that sounds like a wonderful deal. Let me know!
 
Which RV

In 10 years, I've owned a wood prop RV4 with a carburated 0-320, an angle valved 200 hp Christan Eagle, a V35 Bonanza, an RV6 (loaded) w/ AP/constant Speed, fuel injected IO-360 and now...full circle back... to an RV4, my favorite. The 4, whether it be a carb 320 fixed wood prop or an injected 360 CS, to me, has the quickest roll rate, best visibility and is bar none, the funnest plane to fly. My wife is content with her "own space" in the back (as she has never had any intentions of learning to fly) and has better visibility from the back of my 4, than she did from the passenger side of our 6. Besides, most of my flying (90%) is solo and nothing beats the feeling of that "in-line" view; better than the 8 (where the slider and the fixed portion of the canopy meet obstruct visibility). I'm 6.1" and the 4 fits me "like a glove", very comfortably.
 
I second the motion of ---Lella

I started with a -4, first finished in 1988 and sold it after about 1,400 hours. I built a -9A after retirement, finished it in 2003 and used it for 600 hours. Now I'm back to a -4 with an 0-360 and C/S that I was involved in helping build for a friend, now deceased. I bought the -4 from the estate, and to make it my own, (it already was half mine based on what I built for my friend) and converted it to a fastback a couple of winters ago. With the fastback there is hardly anything better, if the front seat fits you.

Attached is a link to a photo:

https://picasaweb.google.com/jaknjoan/20100415RV4FastbackModification02

100_1723.JPG
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Pick of the litter

My first trip to Oshkosh was in 1976. A soon to be famous designer named Burt Rutan showed up with an airplane the got everyone's attention. The new futuristic Varieze was a sensation. At the standing room only forum tent, some joker ask Burt if he could make the Varieze side by side. The crowd groaned.... Here was a brand new, out of this world design, and this clown wanted Mr. Rutan to change it.

Burt smiled and told a story about his first wife that had everyone laughing, then turned to the man and said: "Don't let anyone take center line seating away from you. That is the way airplanes should be. Everything else is a compromise."

I couldn't agree more. Since you will be flying your new RV solo about 90% of the time, then you should build the plane you really want. If that is an RV-9A, go for it! But if you heart is else were, follow it!

All the RV's are truly great airplanes. IMHO, Van's two tandem designs are the pick of the RV litter.

OBTW...How do you know that you won't like aerobatics? The famous founder of VAF once told me that: "Anyone that does aerobatics or formation is crazy." Today he flies formation like Blue Angel #4 and can be seen putting on his parachute for some early morning aerobatics from time to time. It would have been a pity if his RV-6 had been a 9.
Never say never!
 
Last edited:
Thanks for your input! I guess I've never experienced aerobatis, however I have the worlds lamest stomach. It took me about a year to get over butterflies and a churning stomach just doing normal boring private pilot stuff. Now a couple years later that type of thing doesn't even phase me and I'm slowly starting to get a bit more adventurous, however I'm not sure if or when I'll be comfortable with aerobatics. Either way if I get a plane that's capable of them and one day I decide I like them, I've got that going for me. If I happen to get a 9 and decide I want to one day, then it'll be an excuse to get another RV, or sell the 9 for something else.

I'm going to attend the local EAA meeting this weekend and get to know some of the local vans guys and see if I can bribe them for a ride.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top