VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

- POSTING RULES
- Donate yearly (please).
- Advertise in here!

- Today's Posts | Insert Pics


Go Back   VAF Forums > Main > RV General Discussion/News
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 11-22-2010, 07:14 PM
GHRoss3's Avatar
GHRoss3 GHRoss3 is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Niceville, FL
Posts: 46
Default RV-7 vs RV-6 flying qualities & other differences

Van's website provides performance and specification differences between the RV-6 and the RV-7. There's not that much difference between the two models other than lighter gross weight, 4 gals of fuel, and smaller wing on the RV-6. What are the flying quality differences between the two models? Why the rudder height increase with the RV-7? Even though the spec pages shows identical sizes, are there differences in the cockpit size? I sat in my first RV-7 two weekends ago and found it smaller than I expected. Note: I've been lurking on this site for many years and am getting closer to either buying or starting the build process. I'm leaning toward buying a 180 HP RV7 or 6 tail dragger when I retire from the Air Force. Thanks,
George
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 11-22-2010, 08:00 PM
Kyle Boatright Kyle Boatright is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 4,219
Default

The bigger tail on the -7 is for several reasons. First, to improve spin characteristics and reduce tail wagging characteristics. Also, to give more authority for handling the torque of larger engines.

IIRC, the cabin difference is a slightly higher canopy. The width is the same. There may be slight differences in cabin length.

The -6 allegedly handles marginally better, being a slightly smaller airframe. <Also, aren't there differences in how the TE of the ailerons are shaped?>

Van's website still has performance figures for the -6 based on the old (draggier) gear leg fairings and wheel pants. With the latest generation fairings, a -6 should be a few mph faster than an identically equipped -7 because of wetted area differences.

If you're looking for value, the -6 should be a better value if you can find one equipped the way you want.
__________________
Kyle Boatright
Marietta, GA
2001 RV-6 N46KB
2019(?) RV-10
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 11-22-2010, 08:25 PM
schristo@mac.com's Avatar
schristo@mac.com schristo@mac.com is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: WA
Posts: 988
Default headroom is from different seat ribs...

the -7 gets improved headroom over the -6 from a lower seatpan geometry achieved from a different seat rib from the -6.
__________________
Stephen

RV7 powered by a lycoming thunderbolt IO-390
turning a whirlwind HRT prop

with more hours flying than building... 2,430 on the hobbs!
ORCA Flight
Race 771
margarita!
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 11-22-2010, 11:05 PM
Bob Axsom Bob Axsom is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 5,685
Default There are at least two different 6 vertical stabilizer & rudder designs

Ken Knowles and I were finishing our RV-6As at the same time Mine is a smaller unbalanced design. His had the balance horn and was larger.

Bob Axsom
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 11-23-2010, 05:20 AM
pierre smith's Avatar
pierre smith pierre smith is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Louisville, Ga
Posts: 7,840
Default George, I've flown both models many hours....

...and my pick remains the -6/-6A models. I had 500 hours in my -6A, a lot of that transition training nearly 80 guys over a 5 year period. They handle like a very nimble sportscar, if the stick isn't too short...cut off by builders. In reality, you'd be hard pressed to determine what you're flying if you were blindfolded. They're both a delight!

Furthermore, the -6 and -4 are definitely the biggest bang for your buck and waaaay underpriced. There are quite a few on Barnstormers priced well below parts cost. It's a buyers market and I personally, don't see that changing anytime soon. Buy a decent, flying airplane and in time, as money allows, tweak it to your liking with maybe a glass screen, 430W for IFR, autopilot and so on.

Best,
__________________
Pierre Smith
RV-10, 510 TT
RV6A (Sojourner) 180 HP, Catto 3 Bl (502Hrs), gone...and already missed
Air Tractor AT 502B PT 6-15 Sold
Air Tractor 402 PT-6-20 Sold
EAA Flight Advisor/CFI/Tech Counselor
Louisville, Ga

It's never skill or craftsmanship that completes airplanes, it's the will to do so,
Patrick Kenny, EAA 275132


Dues gladly paid!
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 11-23-2010, 05:57 AM
Mike D's Avatar
Mike D Mike D is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 456
Default

I 100-percent agree with Pierre, both are great. I have only flow a couple -7?s and I really could not tell the difference between my -6A and the -7A?s.

But first I think you need to answer the build vs. buy question for yourself. There is a lot of info/opinions/advice on this subject if you do a search.

For me, I chose to buy because I could not build any faster or cheaper than an already flying -6A. I am adding my own touches to it as I go. I have the counterbalanced rudder, the updated rudder peddle arrangement, pressure recovery wheel pants, and have removed the center console on the panel. So, there is not much the -7 has over my -6A. The difference in price between the two buys a lot of fuel and a nice glass panel.

The good part about the -7 is that it is a pre-punched build, so it is a little more standard. This means you can get things like an interior package that fit right out of the box.

If you buy, I would go with the -6 and bring along a knowledgeable -6 builder. If you build I would go with the -7.
__________________
Michael Delpier
RV6A -O-320, fixed pitch, GRT Sport, 496
RV-10 - working on finish kit
Houston
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 11-23-2010, 06:58 AM
Andy Hill's Avatar
Andy Hill Andy Hill is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 976
Default

George...

1 major difference is the "legality" of flying aerobatics 2 up. The 7 is cleared for aeros to 1600lb, so with a 1100lb basic weight, and 350lb of people, you can fly with just over half tanks. The 6 is 1375lbs, so even if you can get basic down to 1050, you aren't going to do 2 up aeros with any fuel

Whether that affects you depends on your desire for 2 up aeros, and your attitude to that declared limit (valid to 6g).

I am sure you will get some opinions on here about that, maybe even the rumour about fuel weight not counting and whether the 6 really is any weaker than the 7 is in this regard!

Andy
RV-8 G-HILZ
RV-8tors
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 11-23-2010, 09:31 AM
Snowflake's Avatar
Snowflake Snowflake is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Victoria, BC, Canada
Posts: 3,932
Default

Having flown both (and, incidentally, done two-up aerobatics in both) I have to say that there isn't a lot of difference between the two. The -7 I flew had an O-360, the -6's i've flown all had O-320's. The -7's were a little heavier, the -6's a little lighter. Both flew the same, for all practical purposes.

There are many people flying the -6 with an 1800lb gross, a few claiming they have letters from Van's authorizing it (although when pressed, nobody has been able to produce a copy of one).
__________________
Rob Prior
1996 RV-6 "Tweety" C-FRBP (formerly N196RV)
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 11-23-2010, 09:38 AM
steve91t steve91t is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Huntersville, NC
Posts: 138
Default

If the 6 is smaller and lighter, how does perform with a 160 hp? Compared to the 7 with the 180?

Steve
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 11-23-2010, 11:19 AM
JonJay's Avatar
JonJay JonJay is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Battleground
Posts: 4,348
Default They weigh roughly the same...

Quote:
Originally Posted by steve91t View Post
If the 6 is smaller and lighter, how does perform with a 160 hp? Compared to the 7 with the 180?

Steve
When equally equipped, empty weights are nearly identical. The 7 is a more modern design and has a bit more efficient airframe. Might see a touch higher cruise in the 7, but marginal.

I have flown both. The 6 has a slightly higher roll rate and might be a bit more touchy in the flair. If I could fly and land blindfolded I would not take a bet that I could tell the difference. Lots of previous posts and discussions on the topic.
__________________
Smart People do Stupid things all the time. I know, I've seen me do'em.

RV6 - Builder/Flying
Bucker Jungmann
Fiat G.46 -(restoration in progress, if I have enough life left in me)
RV1 - Proud Pilot.
Reply With Quote
Reply


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 05:15 AM.


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.