VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

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

- Today's Posts | Insert Pics


Go Back   VAF Forums > Model Specific > RV-7/7A
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #21  
Old 08-24-2011, 10:47 AM
brandon67e brandon67e is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Evansville, IN
Posts: 6
Default

Thanks you all for the help, still cant decide though. Not interested in rolls and loops that much, but i want to be able to do a good ol buzz job and pull up and turn at the end and not have to worry about the thing coming apart! LOL The 9 is what i would like to have, but i want to know its going to be OK to do that.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 08-24-2011, 10:54 AM
Toobuilder's Avatar
Toobuilder Toobuilder is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Mojave
Posts: 4,061
Default

If that's all you're looking for, then the 9 will be fine. the reality is there are not too many airplanes that "come apart" due to structural overload unless you do something really dumb... And if that's the case, you are destined to kill yourself anyway.

I have a fair amount of time in the 9 and it is a delightful airplane to horse around with.
__________________
WARNING! Incorrect design and/or fabrication of aircraft and/or components may result in injury or death. Information presented in this post is based on my own experience - Reader has sole responsibility for determining accuracy or suitability for use.

Michael Robinson
______________
Harmon Rocket II -SDS EFI instalation in work
RV-8 - Flying
1940 Taylorcraft BL-65 -flying
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 08-24-2011, 11:31 AM
TOAD TOAD is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Kent
Posts: 114
Default go with the 7

I build a nose wheel 7A because for stength and the performance numbers. I was against aerobatic flight and my mission was to travel. Well that has changed. I love the formation flight and aerobatics are fun. You can choose to add aerobatics if you build a 7, but you can not change your mind if you have a 9. Oh yea I am still in a toss up over the nosewheel issue. Get started!
__________________
RV-7A - Flying
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 08-24-2011, 11:33 AM
David-aviator David-aviator is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Chesterfield, Missouri
Posts: 4,489
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by brandon67e View Post
Thanks you all for the help, still cant decide though. Not interested in rolls and loops that much, but i want to be able to do a good ol buzz job and pull up and turn at the end and not have to worry about the thing coming apart! LOL The 9 is what i would like to have, but i want to know its going to be OK to do that.
Brandon,

Mike Robinson has poured a little cold water on your camp fire and I will add a bit more.

Please see "No Wonder People Bash RV's". It is not OK "to do a good ol buzz job and pull up and turn at the end..." in this day and age.

I was reading some old stuff about Richard Bong, the 40 kill ace of the Pacific in WWII a couple evenings ago. Before going to war, he was grounded for a while and missed an assignment to Europe because he buzzed Market Street in San Francisco in a P-38. He may also have done a loop from under the Golden Gate Bridge but never admitted it. The upshot of it was the temporary grounding but his commanding officer commented, don't do it again but truth is we need guys like you.

We are not at war, Brandon, and live in a different time. It is very, very politically incorrect to do any kind of buzzing these days. You will get caught and if you are not totally spun up on flying the RV, could end up in a wreck.

Sorry for the cold water. Beyond that, if I were building again, it would be an 8 with its center line seating and perfect for practicing evasive maneuvers at altitude.
__________________
RV-12 Build Helper
RV-7A...Sold #70374
The RV-8...Sold #83261
I'm in, dues paid 2018 This place is worth it!
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 08-24-2011, 12:12 PM
aarvig's Avatar
aarvig aarvig is offline
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: KANE, Hugo, Minnesota
Posts: 765
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by N941WR View Post
To me, the only reason to select the -7 over the -9 is the desire to do acrobatics. All the rest is just opinion.
Ditto, Ditto and Ditto. No need to complicate this issue more than you should. Acro or not? Acro=7. No acro=9.
I used to think I wanted a 7. Flew one...then flew a 9. Then went home and ordered a 9A.
__________________
Aaron Arvig
RV-9A
Empennage Done
Wings-In Progress
N568AK Reserved
SOLD…but I'll be back
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 08-24-2011, 12:54 PM
Jerry Cochran's Avatar
Jerry Cochran Jerry Cochran is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sherwood, Oregon
Posts: 981
Default -6a cross country

Susan and I just love our -6a for cross country, having just completed a nice loop of the west from 2S6 to KBIL-KBDU-KBOI-2S6, about 2200 SM with points in between. I keep hearing that the -9 is a much better X-country machine and that makes me wonder why... Our RV is wonderfully stable in all kinds of wind and bumps and gives enormous confidence with it's high-G stubby little wings. I have yet to be in enough turb to dial it back to maneuvering speed, and don't think the G-meter has been over about 2.75 except on purpose.

Would someone explain that please? Maybe the 9 has more cabin room?
__________________
Jerry Cochran
Sherwood, Oregon

RV-7a 707DD Bot from David Domeier 12/01/11
Lycoming IO-360 Catto 3 blade Panel upgrade in progress

RV6a 18XP 1st flite 03/21/07 sold to Dale Walter 10/22/2011
Superior IO-360, Hartzell Blended, GRT/Dynon

Happily "autopaying" DR

"Suppose you were an idiot, and suppose you were a member of Congress; but I repeat myself."

Mark Twain
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 08-24-2011, 12:59 PM
Jerry Cochran's Avatar
Jerry Cochran Jerry Cochran is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sherwood, Oregon
Posts: 981
Default Market values?

One other thing... I watch the RV market closely and I may be wrong but think the RV7s and 8's hold value better than 9's. 6's are real bargains right now.

YMMV
__________________
Jerry Cochran
Sherwood, Oregon

RV-7a 707DD Bot from David Domeier 12/01/11
Lycoming IO-360 Catto 3 blade Panel upgrade in progress

RV6a 18XP 1st flite 03/21/07 sold to Dale Walter 10/22/2011
Superior IO-360, Hartzell Blended, GRT/Dynon

Happily "autopaying" DR

"Suppose you were an idiot, and suppose you were a member of Congress; but I repeat myself."

Mark Twain
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 08-24-2011, 01:21 PM
Toobuilder's Avatar
Toobuilder Toobuilder is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Mojave
Posts: 4,061
Default Well...

Quote:
Originally Posted by David-aviator View Post
...Mike Robinson has poured a little cold water on your camp fire and I will add a bit more...

...My point was that despite the -9 not being designed to aerobatic strength; that distinction does not mean the airplane is “weak” and will self destruct at anything over a 61 degree bank angle. Just pointing out that for the kind of limited yanking and banking the OP wishes to do, the -9 (or almost any airplane, for that matter) is well within its capabilities. I have done plenty of it myself in a -9.

Let’s face it, there are only a few hard rules (ie. GOD’S) governing airplanes continued ability to fly: Don’t over “G”; don’t over speed; don’t exceed the critical AoA; and don’t hit anything solid. Stay within those bounds and the -9 doesn’t know the difference between aerobatic or normal flight any more than a Beech 18, Shrike Commander, or 707 does. That’s the science of it; and while just as valid, I’ll leave the commentary on social responsibility or pilot ability to the other threads.
__________________
WARNING! Incorrect design and/or fabrication of aircraft and/or components may result in injury or death. Information presented in this post is based on my own experience - Reader has sole responsibility for determining accuracy or suitability for use.

Michael Robinson
______________
Harmon Rocket II -SDS EFI instalation in work
RV-8 - Flying
1940 Taylorcraft BL-65 -flying

Last edited by Toobuilder : 08-24-2011 at 01:34 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 08-24-2011, 02:34 PM
gasman gasman is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sonoma County
Posts: 3,433
Default

Brandon, Have you gone and looked at all of the models that you are interested in? A great part of building and owning any aircraft is looking at it. If the purpose is not well established then you might like one over the other...........

Example............ and this is just my opinion.............

The 9, ugly airfoil. Ugly horz stab. Ugly big tail. And the wings are too long. The A sits too tail high also.

The 7, Ugly big tail. And the A sits too tail high also.

The 6, was the perfect side by side all around RV. If you really want to build, then build what you want to look at and fly.

But if you want to fly, and fly for 1/2 the price, then go find a good used 6, 6A. No matter what you do (as long as you finish your project) you will never regret owning an RV.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 08-24-2011, 03:21 PM
aarvig's Avatar
aarvig aarvig is offline
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: KANE, Hugo, Minnesota
Posts: 765
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerry Cochran View Post
One other thing... I watch the RV market closely and I may be wrong but think the RV7s and 8's hold value better than 9's. 6's are real bargains right now.

YMMV
7's typically retail for higher price although I have noticed that builders put more do dads and do hickeys in 7's (i.e. complex insturmentation, constant speed props and the ever popular IO 360 which usually increases the resale value. A lot of 9's that are on the market people are running basic instrumentation and paint and fixed pitch props with O/IO320's...as a result they are less expensive. 9's with IO360's and complex instrumentation are fetching very similar prices as the 7's (although I will not comment or speculate on whether it is right or wrong to install a 360 in a 9 )

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerry Cochran View Post
Susan and I just love our -6a for cross country, having just completed a nice loop of the west from 2S6 to KBIL-KBDU-KBOI-2S6, about 2200 SM with points in between. I keep hearing that the -9 is a much better X-country machine and that makes me wonder why... Our RV is wonderfully stable in all kinds of wind and bumps and gives enormous confidence with it's high-G stubby little wings. I have yet to be in enough turb to dial it back to maneuvering speed, and don't think the G-meter has been over about 2.75 except on purpose.

Would someone explain that please? Maybe the 9 has more cabin room?
The 9 has the same fuselage as the 7. They are virtually identical. The reason people like them better for cross country is because the 9 has a lesser roll rate than the 7 and a SLIGHTLY heavier feel to it which makes it feel more solid (less twitchy) in the air. The wing also performs well up high. It is a very efficient lifting wing.
__________________
Aaron Arvig
RV-9A
Empennage Done
Wings-In Progress
N568AK Reserved
SOLD…but I'll be back
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 03:35 AM.


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.