What's new
Van's Air Force

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

RV-10 vs 2 place RV's ... is it really worth the extra two seats?

How much of your flight time are all the seats full?

  • RVx - 10% of the flight time full

    Votes: 17 34.7%

  • RVx - 25% of the flight time full

    Votes: 9 18.4%

  • RVx - 50% of the flight time full

    Votes: 9 18.4%

  • RVx - 75% of the flight time full

    Votes: 6 12.2%

  • RVx - 100% of the flight time full

    Votes: 2 4.1%

  • RV10 - 10% of the flight time full

    Votes: 2 4.1%

  • RV10 - 25% of the flight time full

    Votes: 3 6.1%

  • RV10 - 50% of the flight time full

    Votes: 1 2.0%

  • RV10 - 75% of the flight time full

    Votes: 1 2.0%

  • RV10 - 100% of the flight time full

    Votes: 1 2.0%
  • Total voters
    49
n468ac

n468ac

Well Known Member
My dad and I are thinking of building an RV10 ... really to just get an extra two seats. Most of the time our RV6A is just fine, many times I fly with an open seat anyway. For those that came from an two place RV to the RV10 are you really filling those two extra seats? Is it worth it to start the building process all over just to burn more fuel, have higher insurance, and two extra seats? Or would you keep your RVx two place and go with a parntership on a XXXX four place plane?
 
Last edited:
I'd love to have the extra seats and the bigger plane but California will make sure that I end up hating it with the yearly tax on a plane worth 200,000 or so.
That's around $200 a month to Arnold. No thanks.
 
You are the best judge if it is worth it

Many wives do not fly and perhaps kids don't either. So if you only make one or two long trips a year where you need 3-4 seats maybe it is simpler to fly commercial on those few occasions.
 
I recently examined my position on this topic. With the completion of my -9A, it was time to consider what was next. All along, I had fully intended to build a -10 next. I was almost certain of it. Then I flew the first 110hrs of my -9A with the left seat empty for 80+% of the time. That really surprised me and got me thinking about why I would want to burn the extra fuel etc.. So, my final conclusion is that I'm NOT going to build a -10 (no kids, wife is a pilot) and do a -8 instead. More solo bang for the buck but still with lots of utility. Tanya and I agreed that we would keep the -9A and maintain both airplanes after the -8 was done. We'll call it his and hers, she gets the -9A.
 
Different mission

Not really a valid poll. It depends how you plan to use the aircraft.

As been discussed in another thread, many women do NOT consider flying in an RV, traveling --most generally this refers to the 2 seat RVs. You CAN go far and fast, but it is not the most comfortable way to go. To them it's cramped, noisy and may not have the best temperature control.

The -10 however can be equipped comfortable (plush interior, AC, in-flight entertainment, etc) as a cross country traveling machine! If this is your intended mission and you wanna have any hope of using it as the family traveling machine, then it doesn't matter what percentage of the time the extra seats are filled. The -10 is a no brainer.

Shoehorning you and another in one of the 2 seat RV for 3 hours with a stick between their legs, may cover a lot of ground, but it won't be comfortable. The -10 also has a stick but at least they can recline the seat, have more room and have interior space comparable to a standard automobile.

It's like comparing an four seat BMW sedan to a Mazda Miata. Pick you mission and then choose the best aircraft to meet it.
 
I've considered a 4 seater (including the -10) several times over the years. My typical conclusion is that I won't build a -10 because most of my flying is solo and there are very few times a year where there is a need to have more than one passenger. Besides, I like doing aerobatics, and the -10 isn't suitable for that.

In the end, building a -10 would give me a bigger, much more expensive (both in operating and up-front costs) airplane that doesn't fit my *typical* mission nearly as well as my -6 does.
 
There will be a day!

I fly 75% (or more) solo. I use the plane for some business but mostly get back and forth to our island house where we 'ideally' would love to raise our family. Meanwhile the bucks are in Atlanta. So I fly my wife and infant child back and forth once for every three trips I make. There will be a day, however, where I will have to change how we travel or change to a bigger airplane.

Spam cans are not a great alternative. Being able to maintain your own airplane is very empowering and the speed is HUGE!

A partnership would be a great way to go, just not too many 10's out there.

Who knows what the next 4 years will bring??

I hope to keep the RV7 no matter which direction we take. The speed, efficiency, and economy is UNBELIEVABLE! I just flew from Atlanta to north of Miami in 3:20hrs at 65%- $100.

PLUS- it's just so much fun!
 
Rent

I have a Cardinal. Most of my flying is solo, but when my 6 is finished, I'll keep both as we do use the Cardinal for family vacation. Once the kids are gone I'll sell it. I would rent when I needed 4 seats if I did not have the Cardinal.
 
RV 7A to a 10

I went from a 7A to a 10. You are right in that the seats are empty a lot. But the 10 is much roomier than the 7 for a tall pilot (me). Also it is nice to haul four when you want to. Also it is nice to have extra room for stuff that you haul. I find the 10 uses about 3.5 gals an hour more for the same speed. The 7 was more fun to fly. Maintenance is about the same. The 10 is better for cross country in my opinion, more stable and comfortable.
Final point, need to be careful with that pencil, it always is expensive. This is for fun, so don't ruin it with a cost analysis. You gotta go with what you like (and can afford). Hard as heck to put a actual dollar value on fun.
 
w1curtis said:
Not really a valid poll. It depends how you plan to use the aircraft.

As been discussed in another thread, many women do NOT consider flying in an RV, traveling --most generally this refers to the 2 seat RVs. You CAN go far and fast, but it is not the most comfortable way to go. To them it's cramped, noisy and may not have the best temperature control.

The -10 however can be equipped comfortable (plush interior, AC, in-flight entertainment, etc) as a cross country traveling machine! If this is your intended mission and you wanna have any hope of using it as the family traveling machine, then it doesn't matter what percentage of the time the extra seats are filled. The -10 is a no brainer.

Shoehorning you and another in one of the 2 seat RV for 3 hours with a stick between their legs, may cover a lot of ground, but it won't be comfortable. The -10 also has a stick but at least they can recline the seat, have more room and have interior space comparable to a standard automobile.

It's like comparing an four seat BMW sedan to a Mazda Miata. Pick you mission and then choose the best aircraft to meet it.
Click to expand...


Goal of this thread is to figure out if it would be better to get in on a partnership on a 4 seat spam can, just rent from the local flight school of the times you need a 4 seater ... or build an RV10. I hope to hear from RV10 drivers that had an RVx before building the RV10 ? really to see if they use the extra seats.

I agree the RV10 is a different mission, but disagree on two seat RV?s aren?t good for cross country ? our interior is very nice, warm, with plenty of room for our passenger. Our passenger stick is removed when flying cross country with a non-pilot passenger; we have a portable DVD player, FM/AM/CD/MP3 radio, and heated seats.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top