RV 9A or 10--operating cost
 

I know this is a complex question, but my 'mission' decision is really split. So the cost to operate might be my tie-breaker. If I want to cruise at 140-160 kts, will the RV 10 cost a lot more to fly than the 9A, or a little? (Costs to build understood).

I'd also enjoy knowing opinions on the same question for used plane types that RV builders decided not to buy. Hope I didn't miss a thread or post...new guy, obviously.

Hi David, welcome to VAF!

I built and flew my -9A for several years and it was very economical. Due to our growing family, the -9A no longer fit my mission and I'm building a -10 now.

Cost-wise, I'm expecting the insurance for the -10 to be double($2000+ vs $900), the fuel burn to be almost double(cruise 11GPH vs 6GPH), and there's the matter of the IO-540 overhaul costs when that time comes. I think only you can really determine if those figures constitute "a lot". Which ever way you go, you're going to love your RV!

Hi David, what airport do you operate from? I'm in Clarion, PA, not too far away, and we fly over your way often.

As to your question, I suspect that fuel costs, defined as miles per gallon, are more similar than most people might think. I've spent a lot of time collecting and verifying efficiency data, here is a plot of fuel efficiency (nautical miles per gallon) against cruise altitude for my cross country flights.



To make it really simple, I routinely climb to altitude and throttle back to 10 GPH and see about 170 kts. The nine should be able to do a little better efficiency wise, at a slower airspeed, but I bet the difference is small.

Insurance is a function of hull value. Maintenance costs should be similar, except for those two extra cylinders. I'm hoping I don't have to worry about that for a decade or two, but overhauls aren't inexpensive.

Good luck with your quest, -Andy

Good data points. Also consider a potential difference in CS vs. FP prop, if you were to consider for example an FP on a -9A vs. a CS on the -10, and whether it's 2-blade vs 3-blade CS. Overhaul prices on your propeller will go up significantly depending on your choice, which will impact your hourly cost.

The difference in overhaul cost between an O-320 and a -540 is pretty significant ... I would not ignore it thinking it'll only come 10-15 years down the road.

Also, is it just a matter of seats, or might you also fly different profiles/missions? If you have a VFR -9A vs. an IFR -10, the data/publications subscriptions for your IFR platform should also be taken into account.

Thanks for the info!

I've only had the license for one year. Learned in a Diamond DA-20 at KBKL, and have been getting to know the 172 at KCGF. My dad and my kids are in various cities 2.5h away (for a 172) but I bet it's a shorter hop at higher airspeed. Family (potential 3rd rider) are the only argument for an RV-10. My dad is actually a significant part of my interest in a kit.

Wife hates the DA-20: cramped, and she can only see sky (She's 5', I'm 6'1"). Prefers space of 172, but my landings in that bird suck so far. It appears the RV uses a stick instead of yoke (which I prefer...have flown back seat in the T-38 and F-4...which tells you my age). It would be fantastic to meet an RV builder who would let us sit in a plane, learn opinions.... If you park or travel to a place we can reach, send me an e-mail, please!

Right now the income stream allows splurges, like empennage...wings.... But someday it will be a fixed income, and the cash flow of each flight will become more important.

My costs for fuel in my RV-9A (fixed pitch, IO-320) charted over 2 years has been just under $30/hour. Cruises at 147-150Kts TAS at 6-7 gph. Total time on it so far is just over 250 hours. My annual costs this year were pretty much oil change and filter, along with a new crankshaft nose seal ($14). In the last year I put on new tires and brakes.

My wife needs a booster seat to see over the panel, and she is 5' 7" (I'm 6' 2").

Cabin room in the -9 is a bit on the tight side. Have you looked at the -14?

When your wife says the DA-20 is cramped, is she referring to the smaller overall cockpit of a 2 seater vs a 4-seater? An RV-9 isn't going to give you more room than the DA-20, but it will be a much better performer.

Sounds like you want a 14 or 10.

Cash flow on each flight for my 9A is the cost of fuel to fill it up. Actually, when I have compared fuel costs for similar trips via car vs plane my 9A wins hands down. An example is a 3 hour flight from my home to Canyon City, CO. I have driven that trip so many times I cannot even recall how many. I have flown it 4-5 times since finishing the RV. Flying I burn right at 21 gallons one way. Driving takes at least two fuel stops where I am putting in approximately 20-25 gallons per stop so anywhere from 40-50 gallons one way. The differences in 100LL and auto gas prices have never been far enough apart to make the road trip cheaper than the flight.

My fuel burn is pretty much the same as BruceH. 145-160 knots burning 6.5-7.0 gph.

There are four flying RV-10s in the central Ohio area. I'm based at KDLZ, which is north of Columbus. We have a RV-3, RV-4, RV-6, RV-7, RV-8, RV-10, and a 75% complete RV-14 located here. I built and fly a RV-10.

If you want to fly or drive down, we can get you and your wife a ride.

bob

The RV9 will pretty much cost you 1/2 as much to maintain and operate as a 10 no matter how you slice it. I have a 9 and my hanger buddy has a 10. We both have envy of the others plane. LOL The 10 sure is nice on a long trip. The 9 is just plane fun.

Don
 

I don't cruise that slow so bear with me.

The RV-10 is an absolute cross country dream machine. Here is my typical cruise:
- 7K to 12K
- 2350 to 2400 RPM
- 23.5" MP or WOT
- LOP, 10.5 to 11.8 gph
- 170 knots TAS

Add to that real four place and baggage capability. I'm still amazed at how well it flew on our first long trip - Key West with two real guy, two wives and all the stuff the wives wanted to take.

Current insurance cost is $1496 ($150K hull and standard liability). As comparison, the last policy for my RV-8A was $1150. I'm a mid-time IFR rated pilot.

So - the RV-10 will not win on a cost per mile or cost per hour scale. This is where you inject what you want the plane to do, and what your wallet can stand to build it. Don't overlook the RV-10 being more than twice as hard to build as the typical two place RV (it has a boatload of fiberglass work).

Considering your wife's preference, and assuming you don't fly with more than two people, look at the RV-14. I first turned up my nose on this plane as I considered it a "fat boy RV-7". The RV-14 can best be summed up as a two place RV-10 that is aerobatic. I'm helping a builder now finish up his RV-14. The cockpit room has too be seen to believe. Add to that the more efficient RV-10 type wings and you have a great two place cross country airplane.

Carl

What he said ... If that's a major factor, be sure to try on a -9 or -7 (same cockpit) for size, as they're not exactly roomy ... your wife may not like them.

I'm going to build first and hope she doesn't complain later :P

The whole key to the economics of the 10 is how you use the additional room. I have back seaters more than I don't and they often pitch in for fuel reducing the cost.

When we went to OSH, we carried a cabin tent, toolbox, double layer air mattress, two sleeping bags, two pillows, two carry on sized suitcases, two umbrella chairs, cover, tie down stakes and straps, etc and a mid sized cooler.
Two seaters either shipped their stuff UPS at a cost, or bought it there and donated it to the local Boy Scouts at a cost. Or they did without.
Either airplane wins hands down depending upon how the back seat figures into the equation.

One other factor to consider is that when the time comes to sell, the 10 has a much broader market. A lot of Bonanza, 182, Mooney, cirrus folks are interested in 10's, but a two seater just isn't their cup
of tea. Nice 10's can sell for significantly more than their cost to build.

I'm not flying yet...
 

...but my wife insisted on the 10. I pitched a 7 or an 8 for dual XC comfort, plus "fun flying" capabilities, but she replied with, "Are you building this plane for you or for US?" Game, set, match...

Her thoughts:
- Bigger equals more comfortable in turbulence
- Room for kids or friends to go fly
- More luggage capacity for a "date trip"

My thoughts:
- Next one will be a 3B, just for me ;)