How did you decide which RV to build?

[Chino Tom]

I've built both a -6 and a 8A. There was no 8 or 9 when the -6 was built.
I choose the -6 because it was side by side and the taildragger looked
so good and I wanted the challange of the conventional gear. My dreams
turned into reality. We mostly found ourselves hunting hamburgers or
travelling. For the next step, the RV-10 would have been best but was
beyond the budget. The extra room of the -8A (the RV-6 was tight in the
shoulders) and it's better CG possibilities with front and rear baggage
compartments were the deciding factors for us (my wife LIKES the back
seat of the -8A). And although the nosewheel brought grief from my
friends, it was a good practical choice for me.

Any choice will be a good one.

[Bob Axsom]

I thought that was the best airplane for us when I made my choice (there were no 7,8,9,10 airplanes at the time). I am very much a romantic sort of guy I guess but I like to have my wife by my side. When I went to North Plains, Oregon to get some builder training that was offered at that time by Van's the RV-8 fuselage was being developed and it sat there beside us in the classroom. The shape of it is perfect in my eyes and if I were a single guy that is what I would build. They are much faster than every other Van's design (yes I know about that one exceptionally fast RV-4) as is proven time and time again in every SARL race (Alan Carroll has taken the results of several years of SARL cross Country race results and verified this). I am doing everything I can to make my RV-6A faster and if I don't screw up I usually beat everything but fast RV-8s and 200 hp RV-7s.

All RVs of the same number designation are not alike. In my opinion all of the RVs have too little fuel capacity for serious cross country flying and when not racing I install tip tanks bringing the capacity up to 55 gallons. That gives me good 4 hour max power operation at 2450 rpm at any altitude with IFR + reserves. For racing I, replace the stock 12" tips and 9" tip tanks with 3" streamlined tips of my own manufacture, remove the steps, install subfairings on the wheel fairings, and tape all of the landing gear seams. The other speed mods stay on full time. The O-360 is the largest engine specified by Van's for the RV-6 but I intend to boost the performance of mine in the next year or so. I think the wing tips on the later model RVs look like a bird flaring for landing - I don't like them at all but that's just me. What ever I built would have a different wingtip design installed. RV-6s are no longer available so in my current situation I would build an RV-7A. It is fast and RV-9As are slow, I couldn't care less about aerobatic capability or low speed capability. RV-10s are fast (surprisingly so based on race performance) but it just doesn't fit my desires. If my situation were different the RV-8 is the only RV I would consider.

Bob Axsom

[eric_marsh]

1> My wife doesn't want to sit behind me.
2> I want the option of aerobatics.
3> I'm very limited on funds.
4> I found a 6a kit (2 emps, wings, fuselage) on Barnstormers for $6500

And that's that.

[N941WR]

Prior to the RV-9, I had a 1941 T-Craft BC-12/65. As in model B 12, Continental powered, 65 HP 95 mph screamer.

I loved that little plane and landed it on every grass strip I flew over. However, 95 mph and a 38" cabin width were a bit limiting.

I started on an RV-6 tail kit around 1998 or so and it languished. Then Van's announced the RV-9, nose wheel only, with the O-235. I promised myself that if they ever came out with a tailwheel version of that plane I would build one. It didn't take long for Van's to move the little wheel to the back and I ordered one.

At the time, the -7 had not been announced but even then, I doubt I would have built one.

As much as I love my -9, if I were to build a second plane, I'm not sure what it would be. The -10 would be nice because a two place with a three place family doesn't work out very well. If I gave the -9 to my wife and built a -3, then I could stuff both planes in the hangar and if we took a trip, we could take both planes. So, which is cheaper, one RV-10 or one RV-9 and one RV-3?

If I were to build another two place RV, it would be the RV-8 because I think they look great!

As for those grass strips is used to visit in my T-craft, now I do it in my RV-9.

[gasman]

Originally Posted by eric_marsh

1> My wife doesn't want to sit behind me.
2> I want the option of aerobatics.
3> I'm very limited on funds.
4> I found a 6a kit (2 emps, wings, fuselage) on Barnstormers for $6500

And that's that.

Eric, I sent you a PM................

[Sparky]

As everyone always says, "it depends on your mission." This is so true.

My mission is for day/night, vfr/ifr, cross country, and light aerobatic with sustained inverted flight (yes, I actually enjoy it). Also, I like to fly fast when I want to. I wanted conventional gear, and I wanted an RV. My better half insisted on side-by-side seating. I also wanted the newer pre-punched kit. All of these things considered ruled out the RV-3, RV-4, RV-8, RV-9, RV-10 and RV-12 (wasn't available yet). The only thing left was the RV-7.

I am very pleased with my choice. I especially like the RV-7 over the RV-8 because of the panel space for additional avionics and the fact that, whether you fly from the left or right seat, you have access and visibility of ALL panel instruments/avionics.

If I didn't want to fly aerobatics, I would definitely go for the RV-9. It is a very nice aircraft with great characteristics.

I still think the RV-8 is just sexier, and would fit my mission best if I were flying single most of the time (yes, I know, most will say that I will fly solo most of the time anyway, but tell that to my wife).

You really can't lose no matter what you choose.

[LifeofReiley]

Yes... For sure, if you're flying the straight and level (no Aerobatics) the RV9 would be the only way to go. SBS is the way to go.

[Flying Scotsman]

I was smitten with the -10, but the realities of how much it would cost to build brought me back to earth. Soooo....

Most of my flying has been with one other person, anyway, so no need for 4 seats on about 90% of my flights
I enjoy going up with other pilots and taking turns doing IFR work and challenging each other practicing - that means side-by-side
I don't really have much need to fly in to unimproved strips, so didn't "need" a taildragger
Wanted the capability to learn and then do "gentleman's" aerobatics
And lastly...we intend to travel in this, not just hop around locally, and the capability to deal with less-than-optimal weather at times - day/night VFR/IFR.

Ergo: 7A with an IO-360 and a CS prop.

Now all this has me feeling bad that a cold this week has kept me from working on her...out to the garage I must go, first thing in the a.m.!

[pierre smith]

....as several of my tandem owning RV buddies found out. They sold their tandems.

Their wives refused to sit "in that hole back there" as my wife puts it

Let your significant other sit/ride in a tandem and a SBS and save yourself a lot of grief.

Best,

[EdH]

-6 was the only sbs model when I ordered, so that made it an easy choice at the time for the first one. After that was finished, I promised myself an -8 at sometime in the future, so that will be next.