RV-7A vs RV-9A - Page 18

TS Flightlines · #**171** 10-04-2010, 05:43 AM

Guys, All of these comments are great lessons learned, and I will study them all, since you have gone through is before. Guess I need to really look at my abilities, and what lies ahead. I heard someone say something about "repeat offender". I guess I could do that ---maybe
Tom

maximillion · #**172** 10-19-2010, 06:55 AM

Come of guys help me make my decision, 7a or 9a. Was dead set on the 7a but things are brewing.............

rv9aviator · #**173** 10-19-2010, 06:59 AM

The two things that made up my mind were These:

If I remember this right, the guys at Van's said they liked flying the 9 on cross country flights better than any of the others because of the different wing airfoil. They said it was smoother and actually a little faster at altitude.

I don't do acro.

I plan on using my plane for trips with the wife so it was an easy decision.

zspivey · #**174** 10-19-2010, 07:07 AM

If you are considering an RV there is no wrong answer. Any choice is a good one. The 7 will allow acro; the 9 is better for cruising. Define your mission, then make your choice.

When I was building the RV8A, I thought I would be doing acro on every solo flight. I did less that a dozen rolls and less than 6 loops. Since I sold the 8 and bought the 6, I have done only 2 rolls and have never looped it.

The 6 is a great airplane. I think a 9 would fit my mission better.

7AlphaMike · #**175** 10-19-2010, 07:54 AM

The 9a is a great airplane. But you realy cant go wrong with any "RV".
The 9a is the choice if you're not doing acro, and those low end numbers are realy great. Don't worry about sacrificing sportiness with the 9.

IowaRV9Dreamer · #**176** 10-19-2010, 08:45 AM

I chose 9A for x-c. I also like the longer/slender wing (more efficient at altitude). Looks more impressive on the ramp to me. I also like the idea of landing slower, especially off-field if ever needed (sure hope not).

I flew a 6A and 9A (never flew a 7A but similar to 6A). I found the 9A a bit more to my taste - still plenty "sporty" but a little less touchy.

Try to fly both and then decide.

airguy · #**177** 10-19-2010, 08:50 AM

The biggest difference between them is the 7(A) is made for acro and is slightly less efficient for crosscountry, where the 9(A) has the more efficient cruising wing that is happy up high.

I chose the 9A because I don't plan on doing acro, but I do a LOT of long crosscountry flying and I'm an efficiency freak.

bkilby · #**178** 10-19-2010, 08:52 AM

It's like a porsche vs. a camry. Definitely go with the 7A.

Chino Tom · #**179** 10-19-2010, 09:19 AM

One thing to consider is the 42 gal of fuel in the -7 compared with 36
in the -9. That's an additional 1 hr with the same 160 hp engine. Most install
autopilots if they fly a lot of cross country. Not to mention larger engine
option of the -7. I've never flown a -9 but have flown -4, -6, -7 and -8 all
with basically the same wing. The -7 was a O-320 powered with
a constant speed prop and was IMHO the nicest flying RV I've flown.

PerfTech · #**180** 10-19-2010, 09:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maximillion

Come of guys help me make my decision, 7a or 9a. Was dead set on the 7a but things are brewing.............

If you don't do acro, This is a "no brainer"!!!!!!
The 9 is a better choice in virtually every other respect. It is just as fast at altitude (Mine trues @ 197MPH), rides better, climbs better with less H.P., has more useful load, tolerates higher density altitude, lands shorter, and with all of these advantages it may also save your life in an emergency off field landing. With it's much lower touch down and stall speed (44MPH) your chances of survival go up by over 50% per 10 MPH. I fly many hours a month in my 9A, approximately 70 and consider my exposure high. The above stated performance should be considered by anyone who intends to travel and expose themselves and loved ones to potential flying hazards. No Acro? Go for the comfort and safety! Regards, Allan