Home > VansAirForceForums

- 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

Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 02-23-2014, 01:31 AM
alwaysoutdoor alwaysoutdoor is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Twisp, WA
Posts: 44

So I have been doing a little more research on this issue and I just found out that reducing 1 pound from the tail is the equivalent of adding 15 pounds to the nose- I think I am still adamant about the catto with crush plate (as light as I can get away with for good baggage capability) and might try to spend most of my effort and some money to lighten the tail as much as I can. I'll probably have to go with the light tailwheel to save a little less than a pound. Has anybody shaved off weight on the rudder counterbalance lead? The plans say nothing about balancing the rudder weight so what have other people done? I would guess that I could place the vertical stabilizer and rudder on the work bench and balance it just like the elevators?
Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2014, 09:34 AM
Kyle Boatright Kyle Boatright is offline
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 3,455

Originally Posted by alwaysoutdoor View Post
So I have been doing a little more research on this issue and I just found out that reducing 1 pound from the tail is the equivalent of adding 15 pounds to the nose.
The real ratio is about 2.3:1, which is the ratio of the distance from the CG to the tail vs the distance from the CG to the flywheel (where a Landoll ring would go). I'm assuming a nominal CG of 75".

Doing the math, the distance from the flywheel to the CG is ~65" and the distance from the CG to the tail is 224"-75" = 149".

Comparing the ratios,v149"/65" = 2.29

If you installed the crush plate (instead of the flywheel ring), the ratio would be closer to 2:1 since the crush plate would be farther forward.
Kyle Boatright
Atlanta, GA
2001 RV-6 N46KB
2019(?) RV-10
Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2014, 09:41 AM
uk_figs's Avatar
uk_figs uk_figs is offline
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Tulsa, OK
Posts: 890
Default crush plate and landoll

I have both on my -7, there are a number of threads on this issue in the forums, basic issue is the -7 was designed for the CS or sensenich metal prop (42ILB) so with a light prop like the Catto (14LBS) the CG moves aft and with 2 up and 100 LBS of baggage it will be aft of the aft CG at low fuel levels therefore restricting the baggage weight.

I have a landoll and a sabre crush plate and can carry full baggage down to low fuel levels without problems. There are some other things that can make it more manageable as well, in my case I have a bison bag behind one seat with travel tools and oil, and the tiedowns etc in a case behind the other seat both of which move weight forward of the flap control rod leaving more margin for the baggage area.

In addition I have found that 100 LBS is a LOT of weight and with the baggage compartment stuffed to the top for travel and camping etc it rarely weights more than about 70 LBS and is more about cubic feet than weight. When I pack I also put light gear in the back.

As already mentioned the low fuel at destination can also be managed and so far the configuration has not been an issue for me and I am very happy with the prop and the performance.

Happy to send you my W&B spreadsheet to play around with is you like.
Dave (Figs) (RV-7 N256F, Flying)
Dave's RV-7 Blog
Email me
Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2014, 09:41 AM
wirejock's Avatar
wirejock wirejock is offline
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Estes Park, CO
Posts: 3,069
Default Hartzel

Originally Posted by tadsargent View Post
The 7 was not designed for a wooden or composite propeller. Your CG will be aft
And the max baggage will be limited. Additionally with 2 average persons aboard you may not be able to land with minimum fuel on board.
My 7a needed more than a 12 pound landoll ring to help the weight. That's why I put on the metal prop which helped. The solution was the Hartzell constant speed propeller.
Did the C/S Hartzel fix the landing issue with minimum fuel and full load (pass & baggage)?
Larry Larson
Estes Park, CO
wirejock at yahoo dot com
Donated 12/27/2018. Plus a little extra.
RV-7A #73391, N511RV reserved (2,000+ hours)
HS SB, empennage, tanks, wings, fuse, working finishing kit
I cannot be, nor will I be, held responsible if you try to do the same things I do and it does not work and/or causes you loss, injury, or even death in the process.
Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2014, 09:51 PM
PilotRPI PilotRPI is offline
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Hopkinton, MA
Posts: 72

How much longer is the O-320 mount than the O-360 mount, and can you put an O-360 on it?

How much does a typical metal FP weigh compared to a catto?

I'm just starting out and would prefer a FP for simplicity sake, as well as cost, but don't want to limit baggage since I want to use the plane to travel.

Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2014, 09:12 AM
uk_figs's Avatar
uk_figs uk_figs is offline
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Tulsa, OK
Posts: 890
Default Sensenich 42LBS Catto 14LBS

On my -7 i switched the metal sensi for the Catto, weights as in title. The sensi weight included the spacer, the Catto weight was just the prop.
Dave (Figs) (RV-7 N256F, Flying)
Dave's RV-7 Blog
Email me
Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2014, 10:22 AM
rhill rhill is offline
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Valley Forge, Pa
Posts: 604
Default 7a, Catto3B,9a mount

The W&B issue with the Catto is more pronounced with the tail wheel configuration. I have a Catto 3B(it's a work of Art!) with no plans for CS or metal props in the future,for my 0-360,7a and wanted Vans to ship the 2" longer 9a mount.In short,they wouldn't do it,I argued to no avail,I need the 0-360 cowl with it came the 0-360 mount. I'm still in the market for a 9a mount but will make spacers of 1" or more to use on the 0-360 depending on how much extra cowl material I have to work with.In the RV world with weight"Less is More". Chad Jensen built his 7 with Catto 3B and 0-360 using a SJ cowl built for the application 2" longer tail.It improved his CG but didn't cure the problem.It's at times like this I miss the build site formerly known as (Chi.....ay) as he had a great W&B page with everyone's finished weight attached to a spreed sheet you could run different scenarios on.
Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2014, 11:17 AM
Rhino889's Avatar
Rhino889 Rhino889 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Jupiter FL.
Posts: 452

I love my Catto on the RV8. If I was building a RV7 I would plan for a heavier prop.

Just my opinion

VAF DUES 7/13, 12/13, 03/14
Replace paint with performance.

This is my personal account and does not reflect the official communications of We have retained a username for such correspondence. I post about formation, eating, aerobatics and pilot stuff .
Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2014, 11:59 AM
bret's Avatar
bret bret is offline
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Gardnerville Nv.
Posts: 2,785

Some one on here, I forget, used a 5/8" spacer for the engine mount. I will be going with the Catto 3B also and may space my engine mount one inch with the SJ cowl. need to do more # crunching.
7A Slider, EFII Angle 360, CS, SJ.
2019 gladly supported
Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2014, 12:32 PM
tadsargent's Avatar
tadsargent tadsargent is offline
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 304

Larry, the C/S prop was the answer. My preference is to not add DEAD weight. Having the correct propeller designed for the airplane has more benefit than than dollars spent. It really opens the envelop for this airplane.
Tad Stripes Sargent
GRT HXr Glass
Hartzell's advanced composite propeller
Reply With Quote

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 06:46 PM.

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.