|
-
POSTING RULES

-
Donate yearly (please).
-
Advertise in here!
-
Today's Posts
|
Insert Pics
|

01-20-2011, 07:30 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lake St. Louis, MO.
Posts: 2,346
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by pierre smith
.... They all fly well but there's just something about the feel of a -6 that beats the others......
|
I agree with Pierre on that very point. I also feel my comments are not unduly biased by past recollection or colored by pride of ownership issues simply because I am fortunate to fly my -6A and -8 whenever I want. Admittedly, I don't have a lot of time in the -8 yet but in IMHO, both RV's handle exceedingly well. If I had to split hairs, comparatively speaking I'd have to say the overall in-flight handling "responsiveness" of the -6A does seem slightly superior to me.
__________________
Rick Galati
RV6A N307R"Darla!"
RV-8 N308R "LuLu"
EAA Technical Counselor
|

01-20-2011, 07:46 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Dallas area
Posts: 10,769
|
|
Well I'll just say this;
Quote:
Originally Posted by java
Uh oh... Mel? Pierre? Anyone want to chime in?
|
In my aviation career, I've owned nine airplanes. All but one, I owned for an average of 2-4 years. I've now been flying my -6 for almost 18 years and have no intention of building a -7.
'nuff said?
__________________
Mel Asberry, DAR since the last century.
EAA Flight Advisor/Tech Counselor, Friend of the RV-1
Recipient of Tony Bingelis Award and Wright Brothers Master Pilot Award
USAF Vet, High School E-LSA Project Mentor.
RV-6 Flying since 1993 (sold)
<rvmel(at)icloud.com>
|

01-20-2011, 05:19 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: lancaster,tx.
Posts: 74
|
|
rv-6a
Mel is the man!! Besides the tail on the 7 looks like it belongs on a 757.
Regards,
John
|

01-20-2011, 05:35 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Molalla, Oregon
Posts: 955
|
|
Beauty is in the eye...
Say what you want about the looks of the tail of the 6 vs. the 7, gentlemen. I guess it's all what you're used to looking at. The 6's tail looks short and stubby to me. Plus, I want the extra rudder authority and the counterbalanced rudder any day. Vans enlarged the rudder for a reason when they designed the 7, 8, and 9.
|

01-21-2011, 09:40 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Franklin County, VA
Posts: 5
|
|
Pre-Punch ?
Thanks for all the great input.....guess the next question becomes...how much time does the Pre-punching on the RV7 save...and is there any market for
my 6 empennage kit ?
|

01-22-2011, 09:31 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Fort Myers
Posts: 370
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by BSwayze
Say what you want about the looks of the tail of the 6 vs. the 7, gentlemen. I guess it's all what you're used to looking at. The 6's tail looks short and stubby to me. Plus, I want the extra rudder authority and the counterbalanced rudder any day. Vans enlarged the rudder for a reason when they designed the 7, 8, and 9.
|
I can understand the increased rudder authority being a valid bump up (and you'll need it with more weathervaning in a crosswind)...BUT, what was Vans reason for increasing wingspan on the 7? The 6 has low stall speed and good slow flight characteristics as well as more than enough high altitude performance. Why slow a good plane down with more span?
|

01-23-2011, 12:10 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Greeley, Colorado
Posts: 199
|
|
Cozy
I went from a C210 Centurion to a RV6A. The RV is 40 inches inside wall to wall at the shoulders. It's more like a Mooney. Tighter than a Cherokee but way bigger than the back seat in a Long EZ. At least I fly with only one empty seat not 5. Almost the same speed at 1/2 the fuel.
|

01-23-2011, 02:03 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Olathe, KS
Posts: 15
|
|
Build Time
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimpilot56
Thanks for all the great input.....guess the next question becomes...how much time does the Pre-punching on the RV7 save...and is there any market for
my 6 empennage kit ?
|
I've never worked on a 7 but I'm pretty sure there is a significant time advantage with the pre-punched kits. The main spar on the 6 is now pre-drilled, but you assemble it. I think the 7 spar is anodized and assembled for you. The 6 wing skins are now pre-punched, so there is some time savings there. I'd guestimate that the jigging, layout, and drilling of the fuselage adds a minimum of 20% in build time over the 7.
Someone on the forum who has worked on both the 6 and 7 should be able to give you a better build time comparison.
You'll never know about the market for your kit till you put a price on it and try to sell it.
I'm on the finishing kit on an early (1991) RV-6. The only pre punched kit I've had is the firewall heater box. It was easier than measuring, layout, and drilling.
FWIW,
Dave
Super Slow Build 6
Finishing Kit - FWF
|

01-23-2011, 02:18 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Dallas area
Posts: 10,769
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flybuddy2
I can understand the increased rudder authority being a valid bump up (and you'll need it with more weathervaning in a crosswind)...BUT, what was Vans reason for increasing wingspan on the 7? The 6 has low stall speed and good slow flight characteristics as well as more than enough high altitude performance. Why slow a good plane down with more span?
|
The crosswind capability is somewhat of a "wash". Yes, the larger rudder gives you more authority, but because of the larger total surface, it tends to weather-vane more so you need the addition authority.
The -7 has the larger tail primarily for spin recovery. The -6 is lacking on spin recovery after about 2 turns.
The addition wingspan on the -7 is simply a result of using the wings from a tandem fuselage (RV-8).
__________________
Mel Asberry, DAR since the last century.
EAA Flight Advisor/Tech Counselor, Friend of the RV-1
Recipient of Tony Bingelis Award and Wright Brothers Master Pilot Award
USAF Vet, High School E-LSA Project Mentor.
RV-6 Flying since 1993 (sold)
<rvmel(at)icloud.com>
|

01-23-2011, 06:40 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Fort Myers
Posts: 370
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mel
The crosswind capability is somewhat of a "wash". Yes, the larger rudder gives you more authority, but because of the larger total surface, it tends to weather-vane more so you need the addition authority.
The -7 has the larger tail primarily for spin recovery. The -6 is lacking on spin recovery after about 2 turns.
The addition wingspan on the -7 is simply a result of using the wings from a tandem fuselage (RV-8).
|
Thx Mel--but still baffled as to the reason to go with 8 wing as opposed to 6. Don't see much to gain with larger span. Downside is more space needed in the hangar and slower. Was it for the "ease of construction"?? (wasn't that a Barry McGuire song?)
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:50 AM.
|