Also had the chance to fly both, built a 7A and visited several 14(A)'s under construction/that are now flying.
The 7A is more "bang for the buck" overall in my opinion. Money, handling and the fuel situation are better.
But a lot more effort to build and from a much less refined kit in direct comparison.
That kit quality/development level should be a very big factor when starting out fresh in my opinion. It may decide about length of project and chances of completion!
I really wish Van's wouldn't just bring new models but also do a major revision/refresh of the existing models. Fixing bugs and known weaknesses (tip up frame for example *G*).
Also, when you look at that recent performance improvement realized by Van's on the 14A "only" through better firewall forward/engine/fuselage/aerodynamic integration, I'm convinced there is much unexplored potential in the 7A, yet... That cowl exit and floor vibration sure must hide something *G*
I like the look/proportions better on the 7A, too. But that may be biased ;-)
The thick and bulky HS, elevators and tail as well as the (even thicker) wing on the 14A take away from the sports-appeal. And the wheelpants/gear looks bulkier and is heavy duty...
And, from a piloting/handling perspective, the 7(A) wins hands down in my opinion. But whether that aspect is enough to justify the extra effort due to kit quality / less payload and space, I'm less convinced, so it would be a really tough choice for me right now if I had to decide...
Van's really should offer a 7A V2.0 ;-)
Why the handling:
Higher control forces in pitch, and slightly heavier in roll on the 14A compared to the 7A. Overall a bit less "light" and "balanced" feel. Also, somewhat hard to put in words, I'm just not a fan of the RV-10 airfoil handling, which the 14 also inherits. Pitch/power vs lift vector feels much more like your average Cessna/Piper "up/down elevator style" flying, whereas the 7A has that distinct low-aspect ratio feel with large pitch changes necessary, but also allowing very precise speed stability flying. The 7A overall feels significantly more sporty and every power/speed change gives a nicely coupled pitch feedback. If handling is king, the decision is quite easy, IMHO.
The 14 is quite a bit bigger and feels even more so inside.
That also applies to kit cost, engine, fuel flow etc... Often, this translates to higher costs for insurance and hangar as well. Applies to practically all aspects.
However, if you're a BIG guy, definitely choose the 14A ;-)
Another nice advantage of the 14A is the better view downwards and lower side-rails (easier to get in and out).
The nosegear is also much better on the 14A and I wish Van's had already had the sturdier nosegear now available for the 7A at the time of our build. Retrofit isn't as appealing, though. Now with the new style nosegear for the 7A, that advantage of the 14A has significantly reduced, although the jury is still a bit out on that regarding field experience/incident stats.
If your main aim is IFR flying, the 14A would also make the better platform for that. Better stability / less risk of inadvertent attitude excursions.
A significant issue and downside with the 14A I see with the IO-390 not being released for unleaded fuel (at least so far). Being dependent on 100LL IMHO is a significant ticking time bomb. A risk of being priced out or even being grounded eventually, especially outside the U.S... I mean, you're realistically looking at a 30+ year lifespan & investment when starting to build now, maybe longer.
And no matter what you opine and vote for, the environmental trend is realistically not getting any friendlier, irrespective of actual footprint or not.
Doesn't even need to be a push intentionally targeted at flying, but could be fundamental laws with side effects like "no more fossil fuel engines" and you suddenly have collateral damage and an issue procuring spare parts or let alone a new replacement engine. I also share the concern by some that the TEL used for Avgas might be banned/gone sooner than one thinks and before there is a suitable replacement available (at a cost that is bearable).
Having the car gas option open will significantly de-risk that and gives you options to continue to afford flying. It may even make the difference between a paperwork based grounding and continuing to fly...
In the same context, building a new model to go slower than the 7A yet at a higher fuel flow isn't exactly the right trend in efficiency and how things should be either... Again, comes down to more "bang for the buck" with the 7A.
your mileage may vary ;-)