What's new
Van's Air Force

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

Out with the OLD and In with NEW! OSH announcements Begin!

RV-12 used market values

Azjulian, what you just said tends to agree with Cactuspilot's statement that values of used RV-12's may decline. If others, decide to sell their existing 12 in order to build a new RV-12iS, that will increase the supply of used 12's on the market, causing a reduction in price.

However I have to agree with you that we should welcome the newer technology. I am very happy to see that the RV-12 will be available with fuel injection.
 
'New' - 12

Van's has up graded the 12 kit and in my opinion, this is good. The fact that the upgrade makes my still to be completed and flown 12 kit obsolete is real but the facts are that I still will have an excellent airplane when I finish and fly it. The upgrade will cost me some $$$ when I sell my 12 but this is life. I applaud Van's here.

Van's has incorporated almost every upgrade item into the 'new' 12 that I have lobbied for here on the VAF. I would have appreciated a 25 gallon gas tank but Van's knows what they are doing and so, I conclude that this is not such a good idea.

Bottom line, my 12 kit when finished, will fly well and do a great job for me. If I want an upgraded 12, I can build one.

These changes will blow away the competition in the ELSA kit business for years! I'm happy for all those who will build the 'newer' 12 and for Van's - a great improvement and an excellent business decision.

This 'new' 12 will, in my opinion, become the C-152 of the future.
 
All your points make sense. I have just noticed recently a huge drop in the asking prices of RV12s on Barnstormers and elsewhere and I was wondering why....now I know.
BasicMed is why, I think. A lot of RV-12 owners can now fly something heavier and faster, and some will want to do so. I know if I qualified I'd more than likely have my 12 up for sale, and be looking for a 7 or a 9.

The 12 is a really nice aircraft, and the prices for most of the ones I've seen for sale are quite frankly quite a bargain.
 
Are there plans to offer a non ELSA version for IFR flight?;)
ELSA or not is the builders decision. If you register as EAB (Experimental Amateur Built) you have to do a 40 hour Phase 1 (vs 5 hours for ELSA). The 'good' news is as an EAB you aren't limited to building exactly per plans, and can add whatever equipment you want.
 
Punched in the gut

All the praises of the 12 ULS are well deserved. And the new IS looks like a SWEET ride. I'll admit I felt like I had just been punched in the gut when news broke. A little heads up would have been appreciated. But then that's not good for business I guess. Leaving for OSH in the morning. I'll go straight to the IS when the gates open, might even shed a tear or two, that I won't have one. i'll lobby for a discounted price for the obsolete engine pkg. then when I get back to Jonesboro Ar, I'll put that OLE RV grin on my face (cause I'm really close to finishing) and get back to work. Can't wait to FLY that puppy. Wouldn't have missed bending those longerons for nothing (all three of them) Did I mention they should discount the obsolete engine pkg. When ya buy a car at the end of a model year, you know your going to miss out on the new model. But with kits you don't know when the model year ends. Oh well, Maybe they should just discount the obsolete engine pkg. Sorry that just keeps popping up, these iPhones seem to know what your thinking these days. See everyone at OSH

Rich
RV12
On the finish kit
Discount the obsolete engine pkg
 
It will be interesting to see how the real world fuel consumption figures (and climb/cruise speeds) compare between the ULS and iS on what is essentially an identical airframe.

Personally, I don't have a problem with the carbs (and at work we maintain quite a few Rotax powered aircraft) - floats aside... Certainly, it is a simpler fuel system than the iS installation.

One thought on the idea of wing mounted fuel tanks - it's a lot easier removing the wings when they don't have fuel in them!

PS It's always good to see product improvement and great that Van's takes note of what their customers want and suggest and I don't really think it will harm the value of the RV-12 ULS.
 
Last edited:
Maybe Scott can answer this: I just took delivery of the "old fuselage kit" a couple months ago. It's still in the crate, unopened. Due to my work, I haven't had time or space to open it up and do the inventory check. I was not made aware of the new kit when I ordered this one. I'm wondering if I pay for the shipping back to Van's, if I could exchange for the new kit? Thanks
 
I don't want no stink'n slow siphon. I dump 5 gallons into the RV-12 in less than a minute. This won't be possible with the new filler neck relocation...
-
wiu82r.png

Actually the new filler location was designed with filling by fuel jug in mind.
It was tested during the prototyping process and it is definitely doable.

RV-12iS_Gas_Pump_500x375.jpg
 
One thought on the idea of wing mounted fuel tanks - it's a lot easier removing the wings when they don't have fuel in them!
I understand the appeal for a small portion of the buyers, but for (I suspect) most of us it's just not a factor. I'd be perfectly happy to never pull the wings off again. There is just no real need to do so if you're not trailering it. It's just a box to check off on the inspection checklist.
 

Yeah, but us old guys will have to support the 5 gallon jug at arms length. Right now its a straight vertical lift behind the wing that I can probably manage for a few more years as age sets in. I wouldn't dream of lifting a fuel can over the wing. Could go very badly...
 
Yeah, but us old guys will have to support the 5 gallon jug at arms length. Right now its a straight vertical lift behind the wing that I can probably manage for a few more years as age sets in. I wouldn't dream of lifting a fuel can over the wing. Could go very badly...

It is clear from the photo of Micheal holding the jug that it does not require holding it at arms length....
His elbows are quite bent and the jug is nearly touching his stomach / chest just as it might be with the current filler port only you would be facing the side of the fuselage instead of facing fwd, but you are correct that the jug has to be held over the wing when it previously did not.
 
Maybe Scott can answer this: I just took delivery of the "old fuselage kit" a couple months ago. It's still in the crate, unopened. Due to my work, I haven't had time or space to open it up and do the inventory check. I was not made aware of the new kit when I ordered this one. I'm wondering if I pay for the shipping back to Van's, if I could exchange for the new kit? Thanks

Rob,
Your situation is one that we always know will happen as we approach the announcement of a new design. We fully understand that some people will be disappointed and I apologize for that, but the reality is that there will be some people effected regardless of when the transition occurs.

Customers that had fuselage kits on order but that had not yet been shipped were given the option to switch if they are willing to accept some delay while production ramps up for the new kit, but accepting returns of already shipped kits is just not possible.

Sorry.
 
Rob,
Your situation is one that we always know will happen as we approach the announcement of a new design. We fully understand that some people will be disappointed and I apologize for that, but the reality is that there will be some people effected regardless of when the transition occurs.

Customers that had fuselage kits on order but that had not yet been shipped were given the option to switch if they are willing to accept some delay while production ramps up for the new kit, but accepting returns of already shipped kits is just not possible.

Sorry.
As a perspective buyer I like the new changes but . This response really suprises me . I would have guessed vans would have worked with the indivual,as the kit is unopened . The least that should happen is offer a path to convert the fuse to the new style as he builds . Just my opinion sorry
 
It is clear from the photo of Micheal holding the jug that it does not require holding it at arms length....
His elbows are quite bent and the jug is nearly touching his stomach / chest just as it might be with the current filler port only you would be facing the side of the fuselage instead of facing fwd, but you are correct that the jug has to be held over the wing when it previously did not.

Hey, I've got an idea... I'll be at OSH next week and maybe I could demonstrate fueling the new 12iS with a 5 gallon jug. I'll turn 65 in March but still in good physical condition with better than average strength.
 
Yeah, but us old guys will have to support the 5 gallon jug at arms length. Right now its a straight vertical lift behind the wing that I can probably manage for a few more years as age sets in. I wouldn't dream of lifting a fuel can over the wing. Could go very badly...

As a perspective buyer I like the new changes but . This response really suprises me . I would have guessed vans would have worked with the indivual,as the kit is unopened . The least that should happen is offer a path to convert the fuse to the new style as he builds . Just my opinion sorry

No matter what you do, you can't please everyone. Someone is going to be unhappy regardless. It's a tough spot for the manufacturer too. Where do you draw the line? A week before the announcement? Six months? What about the guy who bought his kit a year ago but hasn't started the fuse yet?

Same deal for the fuel tank. I personally would rather see fixed wings and fuel somewhere else, sure. I didn't design it though. In the end, I'd rather be flying an RV-12 than any competing LSA, so the minor compromises are OK.
 
Scrap it???

Got a question for Scott, my fuselage is built, I get it, I need to scrap it because it?s not compatible with the new 12, and I have every intention to order a new 12SI fuselage from Vans at OSH. I have heard the the wings and the tail require very few modifications to be compatible with the new fuselage. So can I keep my wings and tail kits to use with the new SI fuselage. Also I just got the finishing kit, ya I know I need to scrap the cowls and the wiring harness, so will I need to order a new finishing kit or can I just order new cowls and gear hardware? Best guess is the the new harnesses come with the avionics now. Will there be some type of backwards compatibility list?
 
Got a question for Scott, my fuselage is built, I get it, I need to scrap it because it?s not compatible with the new 12, and I have every intention to order a new 12SI fuselage from Vans at OSH. I have heard the the wings and the tail require very few modifications to be compatible with the new fuselage. So can I keep my wings and tail kits to use with the new SI fuselage. Also I just got the finishing kit, ya I know I need to scrap the cowls and the wiring harness, so will I need to order a new finishing kit or can I just order new cowls and gear hardware? Best guess is the the new harnesses come with the avionics now. Will there be some type of backwards compatibility list?

The current wings and emp./tail cone are usable as is Anyone that has those but not a iS fuselage kit can just order the new fuselage and move on.

The primary difference in the finish kit is the cowl and landing gear hardware. The rest is minor (new canopy latch, etc.)and can be retrofitted.

The fuselage and electrical system has been redesigned so that the harness gets installed all at once at the very end and will be supplied with the avionics kit.

If I was in your position I wouldn't scrap any parts. There are now 500+ RV's flying that are using the same parts. over time there will be a need for replacement cowlings, etc., for doing repairs.
Even the fwd. fuselage potentially. I know of at least one RV-12 that was extensively rebuilt after an accident......
 
This News Probably Cost Me $80,000

I was on the fence between the 9A and the 12 mainly due to the baggage area (wanted to fit a Brompton bike or two in there). Well, this settles it, the 12 is the plane for me. A little more range, a little easier to build (compared to the legacy 12, much easier/faster than the 9), extra 25 lbs of stuff and even better on maintenance checks pretty much all of the boxes for me now.

I wonder if this is a one off move or if Vans plans to refine some of the older kits like the 7 and 9 (upgraded plans, less fabrication, etc).
 
Thanks Scott

Thanks for the info Scott, I use the word "scrap" loosely, I have no intention of scrapping any parts.

The new RV-12SI is a fantastic upgrade, I have long held hope that someday I would be able to put a IS engine in the 12 and was not sure of the path I was going to take to get there. I was kicking around building EAB for a while but knew I couldn't just throw a IS engine in there without knowing what I was doing from an engineering perspective.

Do you know what changes the seat design and carpets, side walls will be I have Abby from Flightline Interiors on hold with my seats until the interior design changes are known.
 
For those who don't like the fuselage mounted fuel tank, one might look at the accident statistics for the Diamond DA20 series - all have 20+- gallon fuselage tanks mounted behind the seats. These are used primarily as trainers and you have to look long and hard to find any post crash fires in the accident statistics.

I know it's not an apples to apples to comparison as the DA20's are Part 23 and Diamond places a great deal of design emphasis on crash robustness. Hence the 26G cabins and in the case of the DA40's and later - welded aluminum tanks placed between front and rear spars.

I really don't like the leading edge tanks in most of the RV's but I understand the difficulty in placing welded tanks in an aluminum wing vs a composite one.

Personally I think the RV-12 tank is a safer design than others in the RV lineup.
 
After watching the video, I have several questions....

Was the G load measured somehow when then forklift was accelerated?

Will a gear retrofit kit be offered to existing RV-12 owners? Looks like the same gear legs - just a plate and perhaps some other components?

...I mean it seems like a valuable add - after all in both instances the fuel tank is in the cockpit and attached to the center section and any additional way to protect against a hard landing would seem a valuable addition.

Also - before a bunch of builders in process dump their whole fuselage kit and start over....looking at the video it doesn't seem like there are that many changes....couldn't a current builder just order the new firewall, fuel tank and small number of other parts and move forward?
 
Last edited:
After watching the video, I have several questions....

Was the G load measured somehow when then forklift was accelerated?

Will a gear retrofit kit be offered to existing RV-12 owners? Looks like the same gear legs - just a plate and perhaps some other components?

...I mean it seems like a valuable add - after all in both instances the fuel tank is in the cockpit and attached to the center section and any additional way to protect against a hard landing would seem a valuable addition.

The G load didn't need to be measured. It can be determined by the speed of the fork lift (which was pre-calculated).

The retrofit kit is to build an iS fwd fuselage.
The improved main landing gear leg attachment is more than just different hardware or adding a doubler plate.
 
The retrofit kit is to build an iS fwd fuselage.

The improved main landing gear leg attachment is more than just different hardware or adding a doubler plate.

So...by FWD fuselage - what are we talking about here?

Before a bunch of builders in process dump their whole fuselage kit and start over....looking at the video it doesn't seem like there are that many changes....couldn't a current builder just order the new firewall, fuel tank and small number of other parts and move forward?

On the gear...what "more" was done to the gear?
 
So...by FWD fuselage - what are we talking about here?

Before a bunch of builders in process dump their whole fuselage kit and start over....looking at the video it doesn't seem like there are that many changes....couldn't a current builder just order the new firewall, fuel tank and small number of other parts and move forward?

On the gear...what "more" was done to the gear?

Fwd fuselage means in the same context that the KAI describes it.... the portion that comes in the fuselage kit.

Aft fuselage is the tail cone portion that comes in the empenage kit.
So as already mentioned, the original empenage and wing kit can be used as is.

The fwd fuselage is extensively changed. You can not just buy some parts to build a Gen 1 fuselage into the iS fuselage. If that were possible, it would be be advertised and offered to everyone.
 
Order Form

Looking at the RV-12 order form on Van?s website, it offers a ULS engine option and an iS engine option. If you select the ULS option, do you get the old fuselage, or will your kit include all the new features like pre-bent longerons, redesigned fuel tank, center console with throttle, increased baggage capacity, etc?

http://vansaircraft.com/pdf/order_forms/RV-12/RV-12-order-form.pdf

Do you have to decide on the engine when you order the fuselage kit, or can you put it off until you order the engine?

Thanks,
 
Looking at the RV-12 order form on Van?s website, it offers a ULS engine option and an iS engine option. If you select the ULS option, do you get the old fuselage, or will your kit include all the new features like pre-bent longerons, redesigned fuel tank, center console with throttle, increased baggage capacity, etc?

http://vansaircraft.com/pdf/order_forms/RV-12/RV-12-order-form.pdf

Do you have to decide on the engine when you order the fuselage kit, or can you put it off until you order the engine?

Thanks,

New orders will get the new design fuselage, which can then be completed with a ULS or an iS power plant kit.
The engine choice decision will have to be made when ordering the finish kit.
 
Rob,
Your situation is one that we always know will happen as we approach the announcement of a new design. We fully understand that some people will be disappointed and I apologize for that, but the reality is that there will be some people effected regardless of when the transition occurs.

Customers that had fuselage kits on order but that had not yet been shipped were given the option to switch if they are willing to accept some delay while production ramps up for the new kit, but accepting returns of already shipped kits is just not possible.

Sorry.

Thanks Scott, I understand you have to draw the line somewhere and unfortunately it appears I was in that group of unlucky few. I'm just so disappointed that something can't be worked out. Out of the few in my situation, I wonder how many fuselage kit crates are unopened like mine. I would be willing to pay shipping back to Aurora plus a restocking fee. I've been nothing but pleased with all my dealings with Van's, including my visit and demo flight at Aurora. I'm an avid fan of Van's products and promote them in my flying club and EAA chapter. Again, so disappointed that I, as your customer, am being let down. Please, if there's anything that can be done at all to help me, let me know. Best regards, Rob
 
Rob

If vans will let you can't you just buy the new fuse kit and sell your kit to someone who don't want the new Engine.

Joe Dallas





Thanks Scott, I understand you have to draw the line somewhere and unfortunately it appears I was in that group of unlucky few. I'm just so disappointed that something can't be worked out. Out of the few in my situation, I wonder how many fuselage kit crates are unopened like mine. I would be willing to pay shipping back to Aurora plus a restocking fee. I've been nothing but pleased with all my dealings with Van's, including my visit and demo flight at Aurora. I'm an avid fan of Van's products and promote them in my flying club and EAA chapter. Again, so disappointed that I, as your customer, am being let down. Please, if there's anything that can be done at all to help me, let me know. Best regards, Rob
 
Range

hey, so I saw a comment earlier that the ULS range numbers (now listed) are much shorter than those previously listed.

anyone have a better idea on range of the two options?

currently on the website:
Range iS ULS
Range (7500? @ 5500 rpm) 630 miles 433 miles
Range (7500? @ 5000 rpm) 605 miles 435 miles
 
Incorrect Range Numbers???

Please see my earlier post, #38 on page 4 to see why I think these range numbers can't possibly be right
 
For those blessed with advanced age (beats the alternative) but declining strength, or lazy folks like me, here is the setup I use for my wing tanks, which I lay on the wing skin on a pad, insert the hose, turn the valve, and walk away:

GDtYJkf.jpg


Well, great, imgur seems to not like hosting images now. Click the link.

I am sure the fuselage / furniture pad method mentioned for the legacy -12 could use such a setup on the new -12.
 
For those blessed with advanced age (beats the alternative) but declining strength, or lazy folks like me, here is the setup I use for my wing tanks, which I lay on the wing skin on a pad, insert the hose, turn the valve, and walk away:

I'm sure you are simply touting the simplicity of your system, but PLEASE don't "walk away" while fuel is being transferred into your aircraft.
 
I'm sure you are simply touting the simplicity of your system, but PLEASE don't "walk away" while fuel is being transferred into your aircraft.

I used to stay right by it, but someone said I should get a little separation, what with the cigarette dangling from my lips, and all. :rolleyes:

Short walk for sure, usually around, on a preflight.
 
Back
Top