What's new
Van's Air Force

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

Cost to build

ronsno

I'm New Here
I keep coming back to the RV-14A as the plane that matches my desires, but then I look at costs to build. The Vans cost estimator results in the 14 costing over $20k more than a 7 or 9. Included in that $20k is the engine which costs $10k more. So my questions are, can you use a Lycoming 180 or the Titan I0-370? These engines cost $10k less. If you do does it make installing considerable more difficult and costly. What about FP? The description of the 14 says it comes with more components included. Does this not lower some costs? Are there other areas that bring the cost more in line with the 7 or 9?

Thanks in advance, Ron.
 
You can build and install any engine/prop combination you like, but be aware that the resale value will be affected if you use a smaller engine /FP Prop. YMMV, but I was taught to always look at the exit strategy.

-Marc
 
Last edited:
The design was crafted around the angle valve 390, although the angle valve 360 was used in the second prototype IIRC.

The engine weight is a big part of the design----as I recall, then engines you mentioned are somewhat lighter and would cause issues with the C/G.
 
Yup - the lighter engines would create a considerable CG issue that would have to be addressed.

One thing to consider, however, is that while about the only 390's you'll find will be new, used angle valve 360's are pretty common - if you spend time shopping, you might well save ten grand right there.
 
The design was crafted around the angle valve 390, although the angle valve 360 was used in the second prototype IIRC.

The engine weight is a big part of the design----as I recall, then engines you mentioned are somewhat lighter and would cause issues with the C/G.

Just did a W&B on an IO-390 RV-14. The plane has a custom two blade composite prop instead of the Hartzell BA CS prop. The effect is that the plane, while lighter than the Van's prototype, cannot use the full gross weight as the nose is light. We are thinking of adding a second PC-680 battery on the firewall to both compensate for the light prop, and add some much needed battery reserve.

From working on the RV-14 I have reservations on the direction Van's has gone with this plane:
- Yes - you get pre made wire runs and such. While I assume they will satisfy some builders, I found them to add a lot of unnecessary rework.
- If you want to build a duplicate of the Van's demostrator, the kit takes you there. Keep in mind the $$$ needed to pay your panel people as Van's assumes you will not do your own avionics. The panel blanks are not even included in the kit. Of all the things about the RV-14, the assumption from Van's that people just want to build their panel with their wallets bothers me most.
- Van's makes many decisions for you. For example the fuselage has pre-punched holes for the antenna installs, headset jacks, ELT mount, etc. They also include clunky (my opinion) holders for various Molex plugs that you may or may not use.

The RV-14 is huge. The cockpit is spacious and the baggage area will accommodate anyone's needs. The wings and flaps are straight from the RV-10 design so you get those benefits. You pay for all this in increased fuel burn (think 10 GPH instead of 8 for a parallel valve IO-360 RV-7). The plane, in my opinion, needs the extra HP.

Bottom line - the RV-14 does have more work done for you in the kit. You need to decide if that work is what you want in your plane. I suspect many builders will be ok with this. If you do go with the RV-14 I recommend you say with an angle head engine and Hartzell CS prop.

Carl
 
I think Carl makes a lot of good points. What you gain in the 14 (size, ease of building), you lose in both $ as well as ease of modifications. For some people that is exactly what they want; for me, I needed to be able to build on my budget, which meant building my own panel with a fair amount of used equipment. This saved me literally 10's of thousands of dollars over what I would have paid for an RV-14 type panel. Combine that with a used engine and FP prop and my 9A was probably half the cost of a 14A. It still goes fast, sips gas, and hauls me and my wife and a whole lot of stuff. Remember, the 9A top speed is only 10mph slower than the 14A, on 50 less HP. Cruise is within 5mph. The 7A is faster than the 14A, also on less HP.

What are the criteria that makes the 14 your ideal plane? Are they things that can't be met with any other models? As others have said, a 14A with a smaller engine would certainly take a resale hit. For the same money though, you could probably build one of the nicer 7's or 9's around. I think the 14 is a great addition to the lineup but is certainly not a replacement for the other side by sides, simply aimed at a different type of customer.

Chris
 
Last edited:
cost vs ease of build

I looked at the 7 before I bought my 14 kit. I think that I would have been happy with it, maybe more so than the 14. The 14 flies very nice, but I haven't flown the 7. The 7 would be large enough for my wife and I and would be much easier on the wallet, both building and flying.

The major factors in deciding on the 14 is the completeness of the kit and it is easier to build. Yes, it is more expensive and it is a tough decision to go with it. Before starting the 14 I had a 4 place fiberglass Wheeler Express that I was building. After another child, time away from my build, older boys growing up and out of the house, my mission changed. Easier build was probably one of the biggest factors in my decision to go with the 14. I'm happy with where I'm at, but you have to look at what's important to you.
 
Empty CofG is a very important consideration. As others have pointed out, going with the IO360 would require some careful engineering so as to ensure you can achieve full weight-carrying capacity in the baggage area. While I'm not building an RV, I can say this is a very considerable challenge with the aircraft I am building, a Glasair Sportsman. The aircraft works very well with the IO-390. Ours has an O-360 and, as a result, I am installing everything as far forward as possible so as to get the empty CofG out past the forward limit. The ideal is to be on or near the forward limit with a reasonably light pilot in the seat. This ensures full cargo carrying capacity as all loads including pilot, pax, fuel and baggage shift the CofG aft. I believe the 14 faces the same challenge. It's not a huge deal if you remain very congnizant of CofG as you are building.

Oh, by the way... I don't know if Vans has produced a full set of numbers for the 14's with 360 and 390 power, but there's a good youtube video that compares the performance of the same engines on the Sportsman. Bottom line is pretty simple. The 390 buys shorter takeoff roll and faster climb and faster cruise, at the expense of higher fuel burn and substantially higher acquisition cost. I'm quite happy with the choice of the 360 in our bird - I'll keep that extra 10-20 grand in my pocket and save 1-2GPH, and arrive only a few minutes after the 390-powered birds arrive. Heck, we're building this as a retirement cruiser so 5 knot speed difference isn't likely to make that much difference in our lives. The higher fuel consumption, when buying fuel on fixed retirement income, would be a much greater influence on our ability to enjoy the airplane.
 
Thanks for all the replys. It's back to the drawing board for me. I'm going back to a 7 or 9. Having problems on this decision as well and that's what led me to 14. I saw it as a compromise. I like the idea of having aerobatics but would probably rarely use it, but the 7 has less restrictions.:eek:
 
I just ordered the IO-390 Lycoming from Vans for $31,400. Same price as the angle valve 360.
Unless you are thinking of putting a used engine in your new airplane, this seems pretty price competitive. What does the Titan 370 cost?
 
14 vs 7/9

Get some rides. Rv people love to show off their planes. I bought a 6a and love it. Love it More since I installed the almost 14 seat mod. Wouldn't be without that. I actually looked for a slider to trade for but when I talked to Allan and he didn't have issues that I hadn't already looked at I ordered his kit and did the first mod to a tip up. I have a 14 kit because I have a very tall torso and I want the headroom. it is amazing how much bigger the seating area is. I just hope it flies like my 6a. I'm sure you can find rides in 6/7/9 not too far from most anyplace. The 14 will be harder. I was disappointed in the 9 compared to my 6. To much like a 172 for me. I'm hoping it was that particular 9 but didn't put the grin on my mug.
 
I keep coming back to the RV-14A as the plane that matches my desires, but then I look at costs to build. The Vans cost estimator results in the 14 costing over $20k more than a 7 or 9. Included in that $20k is the engine which costs $10k more. So my questions are, can you use a Lycoming 180 or the Titan I0-370? These engines cost $10k less. If you do does it make installing considerable more difficult and costly. What about FP? The description of the 14 says it comes with more components included. Does this not lower some costs? Are there other areas that bring the cost more in line with the 7 or 9?

Thanks in advance, Ron.

Ron,
I'm not sure your analysis is correct in claiming a RV-14 is 20k more expensive. I think the differential is less than 10k. The engine is about $3k more than a 180HP Lycoming. The kits are more expensive but contain many more parts that we used to by from third parties. As an example, the 14 fuselage kit includes the electric fuel pump, filter, and Andair valve. None of which come with the 7 kit. Many other parts are included which really reduces the price differential. Then if you compare the sophistication of the kit with all the advances in the ease of construction, you time is probably worth the minimal differential in cost. I know after having built an RV-8 which was a great kit but no where near as complete.

Then when you look at what happened to RV-6 prices after the RV-7 came out you can assume resale value will more than make up for upfront costs.

Just my opinion.
 
7 vs 14

Having owned and flown both, the RV-7 and the RV-14, I will give my two cents. When I bought my 7, I ended up changing out the panel, seats, etc. to what I wanted. Once I calculate what I paid for the 7, plus the changes, it is close to equal what I have in the 14. However, I ended up selling the 7 for less than my original purchase price before all those changes. Buy the plane that fits your mission. Mine is long cross country trips for two. The 14 has longer legs, is more comfortable and IMHO, more stable than the 7. Add to that, the view is 10 times better. The side rails are lower, the canopy is bigger, so the view is spectacular. You will also have more head room because the canopy on the 14 is higher than the 7.

Let's say the 7 or 9 is 90K to build and the 14 is 130K. In a few years you decide to sell it. Let's say you get 85% of what it cost you to build it, although I suspect you could get more. For the older planes you will get $76.5K and the 14 you will get $110.5K. So to own the plane, less maintenance costs, the older planes cost you 13.5K and the 14 cost you 19.5K. Are you really making the decision to buy an older kit that will be more difficult to build and take longer for $6K? I didn't build the 7, but I can vouch for the quality of the 14 plans and parts and how much easier it is to build, especially for 1st timers. I can vouch because I got the plans when I bought my 7 and my hangar mate is building an 8. There is no comparison in the plans and parts today, verse the older models. Also take into account that Van's 14 kit does include a lot more of the pieces you will have to purchase elsewhere for the older models. The difference in price between an IO-360 or IO-390 is nill with what Van's is offering for the IO-390. However, if you mission is to keep the price as low as possible, you can probably find a used IO-360.

Before anyone jumps my s*** about the 14 not costing 130K or the older not costing 90K or my 85% number, I'm sure you can build both for less or more, I just used those numbers as a guide to make a point.

Yes, Van's does make some choices for you with wiring and molex connections that you may not want, however, now that the kit is out there, if you want to pull out parts and DIY for the 14, you can.

Finally, I am planning on being at Petit Jean next month and will take you for a ride if you want to see the 14 fly. Or if you want to just sit in it to see how it feels, "if" you have clean feet! I am very proud of my plane and extremely happy I chose to build a RV-14. It might not be for everyone, but it is for me.
 
Comments regarding others comments......

Yes the RV-14 was designed to be a much more integrated and comprehensive kit with a very advanced construction manual, similar to the build philosophy of the RV-12.

That does not make it more difficult to modify than any of the other kits.
It does mean that any modification may be effecting more designed in aspects of the airplane than in the other kits.
This is actually no different except that with other models, the builder was making more systems design decisions so they could integrate their modifications with those other decisions a little more easily.
The kit is definitely biased towards a beginner or less experienced builder, with the assumption that an experienced builder that wants to modify will have no trouble doing so.

Regarding "going with an IO360 requiring some careful engineering so as to ensure you can achieve full weight-carrying capacity in the baggage area"...

When saying IO-360 it requires clarification of what model specifically is being talked about.
An angle valve IO-360 (200 HP) works just fine in the RV-14 (and that is what is in the tail dragger prototype). It is just about the same weight as the IO-390. It is true that the parallel valve IO-360 (180 HP) would not be a good choice because of the lighter weight.

The fuel burn difference between different engines is still a hard rumor to kill.....
Any given RV model, if built identical other than with two different sized engines will have the same fuel flow if both are flown in the same conditions at the same speed. The bigger engine only uses more fuel if the additional power is used. The only economy gained in using a smaller engine is the potential difference in purchase price.

Van's doesn't assume that all RV-14 builders will want to build their panel with their wallet. Van's does assume that a large majority of them will because of the integrated and comprehensive kit design philosophy (and the benefits to inexperienced builders that provides) that was mentioned earlier. Blank panels are available for those that wish to do their own.

For performance comparison -
As has been mentioned previously in other threads in the forum, the RV-14 prototypes (with 200 or 210 HP angle valve engine) have been flown cross country routinely with TAS of 172 kts at 8.5 GPH. This is very comparable to the other side by side RV models with smaller sized engines.
 
I just ordered the IO-390 Lycoming from Vans for $31,400. Same price as the angle valve 360.
Unless you are thinking of putting a used engine in your new airplane, this seems pretty price competitive. What does the Titan 370 cost?

The IO-390 is advertised at 38 700 on Van's web site ... is it common for clients to get discounts like this? I figured the 1000$ oshkosh "combo deal" was the best I could ever hope for, but this is a big difference in price ... that's only 2-4K more than the O-320s' advertised price!
 
I met a guy with a nice 9 this past weekend at a poker run. He made the comment a couple times that he felt like his 9 flew just like a 172. I have flown the 14, but never flown the 9. I was kind of surprised in his comments. To me the 14 did not fly at all like a 172.

Carl

Get some rides. Rv people love to show off their planes. I bought a 6a and love it. Love it More since I installed the almost 14 seat mod. Wouldn't be without that. I actually looked for a slider to trade for but when I talked to Allan and he didn't have issues that I hadn't already looked at I ordered his kit and did the first mod to a tip up. I have a 14 kit because I have a very tall torso and I want the headroom. it is amazing how much bigger the seating area is. I just hope it flies like my 6a. I'm sure you can find rides in 6/7/9 not too far from most anyplace. The 14 will be harder. I was disappointed in the 9 compared to my 6. To much like a 172 for me. I'm hoping it was that particular 9 but didn't put the grin on my mug.
 
I got the 20k difference straight from Vans Cost Estimator. I have no experience and that's what I'm trying to decipher. If I can assume the difference is closer to $5 to $10k I'll go the 14 route. If it's truly $20k plus, I'll go the 7 or 9. I like the idea of the latest and greatest, easier to build and all that this brings.
 
The $38,700 is the price when ordering without the prop anytime of the year. With the prop they take off $1,000.

However, if you wait for the show specials at both Sun and Fun in April and Oshkosh, end of July through August, the price is heavily discounted. I planned on this and got the engine and prop last April for around the normal list price of the engine. It's like getting the prop for free.

No guarantee the discounts will always be offered, but they have been regular as clockwork as long as I've been building the 14.
 
I got the 20k difference straight from Vans Cost Estimator. I have no experience and that's what I'm trying to decipher. If I can assume the difference is closer to $5 to $10k I'll go the 14 route. If it's truly $20k plus, I'll go the 7 or 9. I like the idea of the latest and greatest, easier to build and all that this brings.

Ron, is it really the $20K difference that is the problem, or the total cost to build? Put another way, what is your budget and can you build a -14 within that budget? There are ways to build an RV for less that what Vans estimator says. I bought both my empennage and wing kits second hand back when I built my RV-8A and have done the same with my -14A. That saved me about $4K right there. If you look around you can probably get a mid-time IO-360 angle valve engine for half the price of a new IO-390. So knock another $15K off the estimator price. I have no doubt you can build a -14 for less than what a lot of people have in their RV-7.

If you do a good job building it you should get your money back out of the airplane either way. So...as long as you can figure out a way to afford it, build the airplane you really want.
 
Just did a W&B on an IO-390 RV-14. The plane has a custom two blade composite prop instead of the Hartzell BA CS prop. The effect is that the plane, while lighter than the Van's prototype, cannot use the full gross weight as the nose is light. We are thinking of adding a second PC-680 battery on the firewall to both compensate for the light prop, and add some much needed battery reserve.

Carl, would the -14 owner allow you to post the empty weight and CG for us? Would be nice to add it to the W&B thread (http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=133335) along with any helpful details like what engine, prop, avionics, paint (single stage, clearcoat, no paint), etc.

I looked at the W&B info for Vans prototype airplanes and substituted a Whirlwind 74RV in lieu of the Hartzell and it seemed like you could still put two full size adults, full fuel, and the placarded 100 lb baggage allowance without exceeding the aft CG. I was hoping to go with the WW prop for the weight savings and smoother operation, so I'm keenly interested in understanding what specific prop was on the -14 you're referring to and why it has the aft CG limitation...

Thanks,
 
...If you look around you can probably get a mid-time IO-360 angle valve engine for half the price of a new IO-390. So knock another $15K off the estimator price. I have no doubt you can build a -14 for less than what a lot of people have in their RV-7.

If you do a good job building it you should get your money back out of the airplane either way. So...as long as you can figure out a way to afford it, build the airplane you really want.

I agree. I was in a a similar boat when deciding what to build. I'm most definitely on a budget. I looked at the Sonex, some similar kits, and the RV's. I could have built a Sonex with everything new and all the bells and whistles, but the Sonex wasn't what I REALLY wanted. Instead, I decided to build a simple 9A with a used engine, FP prop, and a simple glass panel with a good number of used avionics. It's all the airplane I could ever ask for, and lightyears ahead of the 172's and 182's I was flying. And for the record, while it's as easy to fly and land (or easier) than a 172, the flying qualities are nowhere near the same. I never felt directly connected to the 172 the way I do to the RV. Much closer to the 6A I did transition training in than to any spam can.

Chris
 
The IO-390 is advertised at 38 700 on Van's web site ... is it common for clients to get discounts like this? I figured the 1000$ oshkosh "combo deal" was the best I could ever hope for, but this is a big difference in price ... that's only 2-4K more than the O-320s' advertised price!

The $31400 price for the IO-390 from Vans was the air show price bundled with the prop purchase. It would have been $1000 more if not for the purchase of the prop.

Total cost for engine and prop was just over $39k. Includes Long term storage and shipping. Like I said, pretty competitive for new components.

You probably can get a similar deal during S&F and OSH.
 
RV-14A W&B

Carl, would the -14 owner allow you to post the empty weight and CG for us? Would be nice to add it to the W&B thread (http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=133335) along with any helpful details like what engine, prop, avionics, paint (single stage, clearcoat, no paint), etc.

This RV-14A has a new from Van's IO-390 engine and a custom composite two blade CS prop (uses a Hartzell hub). The plane is built to plans, has a full dual EFIS IFR panel, and not yet painted (I suspect the paint will aggravate the nose light issue as the majority of the paint weight will be aft of CG). Seven qts of oil in the sump. The one battery (PC-680) is mounted on the firewall per the plans. As I previously mentioned, I suspect we'll end up putting another PC-680 battery on the firewall to help the CG issue and to address the woefully inadequate battery reserve offered by the single battery.

Here are the numbers. Plug them into the Van's W&B spreadsheet:
Right wheel: 434.5
Left wheel: 425.5
Nose wheel: 352.0

Here is the problem. At full 2050 pound gross (219 pound pilot and passenger, 100 pounds of baggage and full fuel) the CG is at 89.6" (aft limit is 88.24").

Carl
 
Here is the problem. At full 2050 pound gross (219 pound pilot and passenger, 100 pounds of baggage and full fuel) the CG is at 89.6" (aft limit is 88.24").

I posted some comments in the W&B thread. I think there may be an error somewhere in the measurements or calculations...the CG you're getting doesn't seem possible on an unpainted -14A no matter what kind of CS prop you're using...
 
Budget Cross Check

All, I sat down and looked at the plans for the 14/14A and developed a budget for what I think my 14A build will look like. My plan is basically the kit standard with a nice glass IFR panel. Do these numbers check?

Forward of Firewall (Engine, prop & all)- $50,209
Aft of Firewall (AF, seats, controls, ect)- $39,134
Avionics - $40,290
Projected Total Cost - $133,632
Projected Overrun - $13,363
Projected Cost with Overrun - $146,995
 
All, I sat down and looked at the plans for the 14/14A and developed a budget for what I think my 14A build will look like. My plan is basically the kit standard with a nice glass IFR panel. Do these numbers check?

Forward of Firewall (Engine, prop & all)- $50,209
Aft of Firewall (AF, seats, controls, ect)- $39,134
Avionics - $40,290
Projected Total Cost - $133,632
Projected Overrun - $13,363
Projected Cost with Overrun - $146,995

You are in the ballpark.

My RV-10 (new engine/prop/glass/paint) came in at $153K (flying six years). The current RV-8 project will top out at $113K.

Just got done buying all the avionics (dual screen SkyView IFR panel with GTN-650). That all came in at $29K, but I?m making the panel. Your $40K estimate looks like it might be a touch high - depending of course on how much you pile on.

Carl
 
All, I sat down and looked at the plans for the 14/14A and developed a budget for what I think my 14A build will look like. My plan is basically the kit standard with a nice glass IFR panel. Do these numbers check?

Forward of Firewall (Engine, prop & all)- $50,209
Aft of Firewall (AF, seats, controls, ect)- $39,134
Avionics - $40,290
Projected Total Cost - $133,632
Projected Overrun - $13,363
Projected Cost with Overrun - $146,995

Your projected overrun is equal to my paint job. Including taxes mine came out to $135K. My avionics could have reached $40K easily but I opted for a G5 instead of a second G3x screen and I went GTN 625 instead of a GTN 650.
 
All, I sat down and looked at the plans for the 14/14A and developed a budget for what I think my 14A build will look like. My plan is basically the kit standard with a nice glass IFR panel. Do these numbers check?

Forward of Firewall (Engine, prop & all)- $50,209
Aft of Firewall (AF, seats, controls, ect)- $39,134
Avionics - $40,290
Projected Total Cost - $133,632
Projected Overrun - $13,363
Projected Cost with Overrun - $146,995

What about shipping cost , paint, taxes, tools (always need new tools) inspection fees? It adds up fast.
Nothing special in mine and I did not go that high on avionics ,(dual Skyview) but I've got more in mine than what has been quoted. Painted the aircraft myself, just had to buy supplies.
 
Back
Top