What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

RV-10 vs. ?????

Mike D

Well Known Member
I know RV's are the greatest, but a -10 costs a bunch of $$ for the mission I am trying to fill. So what are the alternatives and why is a -10 better?

Mission:
- 4-seats for the growing family.
- over 150knts because I don't have much time.
- under $200K because I don't have much money
- low stall speed because I value my life.
- can use short runways (~2000')
- prefer to stay away from certified as I like to tinker with the panel and I value my money.

This leaves out the canards and the Lancairs because they land too fast and eat up too much runway.

I have been looking at:
- Wheeler Express
- Navion
- Cherokee 180 and six
- SR22

Any others you can think of???

Or should I just spend the kids collage fund on a -10?
 
I have been looking at:
Wheeler Express
Not many out there, not a whole lot of builder support (look at this site!). Look at the numbers, how does it really stack up?
Navion
Not bad, not as fast/efficient. As it ages further, expect annuals, parts and support to get more expensive
Cherokee 180 and six
Not going to break 150 knots, and you'll not break 150 while burning more gas (for the six anyway)
SR22
Long term maintence cost? No way are you going to beat a 10. ?



I have looked at this extensively for all the reasons you list.

I'd like a 4 place that will haul 4 people and bags with a balance of being:

Fast, economical, reliable, efficient, safe, etc.

I've looked at everything from V-tail Bonanzas to Velocity, to Commanches, Mooneys, Lancair, Saratogas, Cherokees, 210's, you name it. I always come full circle back to a -10. For the speed/economy/capability you're just not going to find anything better.

Cheaper means slower or less haul.
Production means more expensive (long term maintenece cost, annuals, AD's etc).
Faster means way WAY more money.

Just do it. :D
 
Last edited:
I bought mine less than 6 months ago spent well under 200 K, I was flying immediately, and can make upgrades as time and money allow.
The best plane for the money as far as I am concerned. Will do everything you listed and # 1 reason non-tso'd parts.
 
You can pick up some VERY nice Bellanca Vikings for less than $35K today, and plenty of Commanche 260's for only a few $ more. Sure they will burn more gas and be more expensive to maintain, but the price difference will keep you in gas and parts for a long time.
 
Last edited:
"...You can pick up some VERY nice Bellanca Vikings for less than $35K today, and plenty of Commanchie 260's for only a few $ more. Sure they will burn more gas and be more expensive to maintain, but the price difference will keep you in gas and parts for a long time..."

A couple of points:

You may be able to buy those airplanes but flying and keeping them flying will eat you alive.

Case in point: I own a 172. It needs a battery box as the original has corrosion damage from out gassing. IF you can find one, say goodbye to $1000 or more. The front top nose bowl needs to be replaced. Can't find one...and I have been looking for 5 YEARS. Oh, I can find a new cowl alright, but say goodbye to $8000. There are other examples but you get the idea.

You are also going to be buying, at that price point, a 30+ year old airplane. 'Nuff said about that.

After owning several of these "deal" planes over the years, my experience has steered me to the -10. I am still building but can't wait til first flight. No regrets.

You want to buy a 172? Make you a great "deal". No, I'm serious!
 
...You may be able to buy those airplanes but flying and keeping them flying will eat you alive...


Agreed, which is why I included the words: "...Sure they will burn more gas and be more expensive to maintain, but the price difference will keep you in gas and parts for a long time..."

In the OP's case, his "mission" is a family hauler and his budget is $200k. Yes the -10 will outperform the certified examples, but the $150k difference in price will keep him awash in fuel and parts for some number of years. There will eventually be a crossover point where the -10 makes more "financial" sense, but that point is down the road somewhere. The less the OP flies, the further down the road it is. This type of analysis needs to be done to find out which direction to take.

We often find that adding new modifications to military aircraft, while making them "better", may not provide a return on the investment. Sometimes it makes more financial sense to continue paying higher recurring costs than the high up front of the "new/better".

My point is the -10 may be the right direction to go, but there are many factors to consider - likely far beyond the scope of an Internet forum.
 
Tough choices...

Just to add to the list a few more data points, the Glasair Sportsman 2+2 fits your mission, but it's not really a four-place aircraft, much as the sales people insist it is. Another one to look at it is the Sling 4, which is a four seat with a turbo Rotax, although it's a bit slower than a 10. I was real close to going with a Bearhawk myself. It's roomy, has excellent useful load, good slow flyer and is made for short field performance, but the RV won out for me due to speed. My advice, if you can wait that long, is to attend Oshkosh. There is nothing better than kicking tires on all those planes.
 
Interesting. I've been doing the same analysis. I like the -10, but one will require a significant investment. On the other hand...

A 30+ year old Mooney 201 will fulfill the mission for $65k, and a 40 year old Mooney M20F will do it for $50k or less. A 50 year old Debonair will do the same. You can upgrade through the Bonanza series as far as you want, up to a new A-36 for ~$800k that has similar performance to the RV-10.

All of those airplanes have the same issues. Retractable gear, age, hours, old avionics, old this that and the other thing. Also, a huge lack of flexibility on who can work on them or what equipment you can install.

An airplane with less performance than you have specified is the Grumman AA-5B, which is a 135 knot airplane that I view as 4/5ths of an RV-10 for maybe $50k.
 
My Plan

The 9A I'm building serves no practical purpose given my 11 month old and one in the oven that I've gained since starting the build. So, I think I'll have fun with the 9A for a couple years and then trade to a cherokee 6. http://pristineairplanes.com/. Has some very nice rebuilds at reasonable prices. The inexpensive 10's just won't have the fit, finish, G3x, etc. that Im able to have into my 9A and I don't think I could stomach that "step down" in a homebuilt, for the added cost. The acquisition cost of a nice 10 just ain't in the cards so a 6 or a 182 will have to suffice. Only time will tell.
 
I happen to think a Gen1 Cirrus SR22 is a pretty good bargain now. For between $150k to $175k, four seats, 170kts at 13.5gph, reasonable insurance, nice avionics, parachute, Etc. My Gen2 has had very little unexpected maintenance in the 7 years and 700 or so hours I have owned it. I regularly make 3.5 hour flights So CA to So OR on the west coast and land with about 28 gallons left in the tanks....long legs.
 
Last edited:
Cessna 182

THE CESSNA 182 is one of the best all round airplanes of all time. It has been made since 1956, and is still in production. It will cruse 130 knots. Burns 12 to 13 gph. And haul 4 people. Prices vary with age, time, and condition.
I have a lot of RV time and love the 150 knot ground speed. My C180 will haul all of our camping gear 130 knots. That is not all that slower than the RV8 I fly.
The fuel burn is more, but the difference in mission, is great.
A really good C182 can be bought for $80,000. I do not think you would find a RV10 near that. If you can go VFR, The C182 gives a lot of value for the money.
I think many people would want a nice new RV10 with all the new Garmin 'TV' screens. But that is a lot of $$.
I haven't cked Vans prices lately. you might build a RV10 standard kit with a VFR panel, to compare to an older but nicely equiped C182. And have a new airplane, but,,,,, could you build one for $80,000?
 
Last edited:
I haven't cked Vans prices lately. you might build a RV10 standard kit with a VFR panel, to compare to an older but nicely equiped C182. And have a new airplane, but,,,,, could you build one for $80,000?

I keep coming back to a floor of about $125k with a freshly remanufactured engine for $35k, a DIY paintjob, and a $20k panel.
 
RV10

Just did the Vans Cost estimator. Basic RV10 with a Constant speed prop, no tools, no paint. VFR. Vans cost guess was 107,450, to $119,450.
My C180 has gone all over the USA in the last 3 years with a com and Transponder, mode C. and a 500 series Garmin GPS. It cost $90,000, and I did not build it.
I have the tail wheel , but a 182 will be less $$ and easer to find a good one. Just a little less performance on back country strps.

I am supprised that more of the Bonanza, Cessna 210 owners are not flocking to get RV10s? Fixed gear insurance, all of the fantastic new avionics! And a new airplane!!

But if you are on a budget and need a 4 place. I think the C182 is hard to beat. I am fortunate that I have one of each to fly. C180 and a RV8.
 
Just did the Vans Cost estimator. Basic RV10 with a Constant speed prop, no tools, no paint. VFR. Vans cost guess was 107,450, to $119,450.
.


I think it's time to start a thread "how much did you build your RV for" and compare it to Vans cost estimator:rolleyes:
 
... you'd have a pretty sad RV-10, compared to what's out there being built nowadays.

Yeah, I'd hate to have a brand new RV-10 with a zero time engine and better avionics than any GA type had until 10 years ago, all for $125k. What a moron for even considering it. ;-)
 
Nope!

Plus 3000 hours of building, and you'd have a pretty sad RV-10, compared to what's out there being built nowadays.

Or yes,!
A new RV10 with a new engine, prop, no paint, 1 com, might not 'compare' to most current RV10s. but if you had a new RV10? with only the necessary gauges to get it certified. It would still be Kick A>>s airplane. And I would be proud to have one.
I bought the Cessna 180 because I did not want to build again, at 63 years of age, and the $125,000+, it would cost verses the 90K I used to buy my SkyWagon. Big difference in cost, and time,??

I advise the OP to buy a Cessna 182 if $$ or time is a concern.
 
Touch

Yeah, I'd hate to have a brand new RV-10 with a zero time engine and better avionics than any GA type had until 10 years ago, all for $125k. What a moron for even considering it. ;-)

I hear you, still got to build it though. I'm starting to think that I'd really like to know some final build costs on RV-10's. if they can be built for $125k and selling for $200+ then I think we found the first rv model that turns a profit in recent years. Might actually be worth it from an investment standpoint!
 
Agree with a few others above that unless you REALLY want to build, the best bang for your buck is a C182. Does almost everything pretty darn well and is certainly, in my opinion, a better backcountry plane than an RV-10.
 
My strip is at 7200. A stock 10 comes of the ground about 300 foot shorter than a 182 and ROC is better. They're a pretty good camper.
 
I hear you, still got to build it though. I'm starting to think that I'd really like to know some final build costs on RV-10's. if they can be built for $125k and selling for $200+ then I think we found the first rv model that turns a profit in recent years. Might actually be worth it from an investment standpoint!

Mine is about 10% higher, with paint, new engine, a good panel. I did purchase a pair of used AFS 4500s, switched from a VP-200 to a VPX Pro, and several other options weren't installed to keep the panel costs in line. A local auto painter painted mine which saved about 2/3s over a traditional aviation paint shop.

A RV-10 can be built for $150k easily with all new gear.
 
I personally think that Van's Cost Estimator is at least $25,000.00 low. A slow build RV-10 is more likely to run closer to $145,000.00 in my opinion. I am a former 3 time C-182 owner and if $$ up front and the need to fly in less than 3-5 years is important a C-182 is one of your best bets.
If you enjoy building and want a brand new 4 place airplane with a really nice panel the RV-10 is the number 1 pick.
 
You can probably do a budget IFR -10 for just under 200k and about $220K for a good setup. Lets be realistic. All the bits you want to have, like leather or sheepskin, nice paint etc.

But, if you have $200K as your upper limit, go looking for a nice F33A Bonanza, if the kids are little, or if they are approaching teenage years you have to look at a mid 80's vintage A36.

You want 160 knots? No 182 will do that. You shoudl be able to find a really nice Beech that will leave you plenty of change from $200K and the extra money you have will be invested so you can pay for annuals.

An RV10 is not always the best option in terms of cost. But you get an awesome machine for the money, compared to a new SR22 or G36. And the G36 is only a 3 seater or 2+2(kids).

SR22 is nice but a nice one will be over your budget.

PM me if you want to discuss deeper. I have a bit of experience with -10 and Bo's.
 
You can probably do a budget IFR -10 for just under 200k and about $220K for a good setup. Lets be realistic.

Are those Australian dollars? I have an SB kit (to include the 540 FWF kit), rebuilt IO-540 (from BPE), VP-200, 2-Screen G3X, GTX 23ES, PMA5000EX, GX Pilot AP, TT Gemini, SL 30, GTN 650 and full Flight Line interior so I think it’s pretty well equipped for IFR. Minus tools and consumable shop supplies, I’ve spent just shy of $150K to this point and the only major purchase I have yet to make is the paint job.

Of course, for $200K I assume you're talking about the cost to buy an already flying -10 on the used market and you're probably right based upon a quick review of the ads on-line

To the OP, another vote for a used Mooney or Bo. Based upon your stated requirements and budget they make the most sense with a Comanche a close 3rd.
 
Last edited:
Cost estimate

Ya, I told my wife we could have a sweet setup for 120k with the 10. Two years later and 185k mine was finished. Three screen G3X with IFR GPS and GTS800 TAS. I mention the TAS because it added 9000$ to my avionics. Most Aerosport products, leather interior, slow build, 0 time engine/prop. Never looked back at the money spent for how much fun we have in ours. Cheap to maintain, fairly cheap to fly. 10gph, 160kt gs LOP.
 
Yes to Bearhawk!

Bearhawk fits your mission to a T.
155 knts at 8500 or higher.
Take off and land with 4 people on a 1500' strip.
Carries 4 grown ups and all their baggage.
A lot of them being manufactured and parts available.
Cost for a really nice one will be around 120,000.
It's an experimental!

I had one for two years and sold only because my family mission required 5 seats with full baggage.
 
And then there are families wiped out in traffic accidents. Maybe the lesson here is that families just shouldn't travel together... :rolleyes: Seriously? I know several families who travel regularly by plane. Sure, you can point to incidents like the exec who recently died with his son as they were touring colleges but then I can point to a friend who annually flies with his son to OSH and, also annually, takes his family to a family reunion that happens in a different location each year. Or another friend who regularly flies with his wife to see the kids at the other end of the country. Heck, I know several people like that just in the circle of friends at my airport.

I can't wait until I get the -10 done and my wife and I can do some serious traveling. She likes flying with me but the -6A is a little cramped for her for more than day trips. I could borrow a friend's C-182 now but it really wears me out to fly one, especially the landings. It's not fun planting your feet on the panel to flare ... Ok, I'm exaggerating but, really, after flying an RV a 182 is a beast. And you can buy one right now and cheaper than a -10 but it'll cost you more in maintenance. And fuel. And time. Possibly the right thing to do is find one you can use while you build a -10; best of both worlds.
 
Piper Archer II

In 1982 Jeanine and I bought this 1981 Piper Archer II for $52,000

IMG_zpsca4c6413.jpg


In 1988 we had it painted in Imron in our color scheme for ~ $7,000

IMG_0001_zps12044cd0.jpg


We flew it every where including this dirt strip at Meling Ranch in Baja.

IMG_0002_zpsbcc0570a.jpg


We flew with 4 full size adults with full fuel and baggage on MANY Flying Club fly-ins all over the southwest and Mexico (as far south as Cabo San Lucas on Baja and Puerto Vallerta on the mainland) and trips with just Jeanine and I all over the country and into Canada (Victoria, Vancouver, Thunder Bay). I flew it to work every day in Los Angeles for 15 years day or night rain or shine. I learned to fly in Cessna 150s and 172s but the first time I flew in a low wing airplane I knew this was the configuration for me. I got my instrument rating in the Archer and although it had a Century 21 Autopilot I almost never used it - it flew so well that it never entered my mind to use it. I realistically flight planned for 120 knots.

Toward the end of my working life in we decided to build an experimental that I could maintain myself including the annual inspections. I studied the kits available and we selected the RV-6A in 1996. I continued to work and at night and on weekends we would build until in March of 2004 I made the first flight. I retired in September of 2004 after the mission I was working on at JPL was completed. WE SOLD THE ARCHER FOR $50,000. We moved to Arkansas and completed the RV-6A with our design paint job done by Gray's Aero Refinishing in Ozark, Arkansas.

IMG_7092_zpsfa5ecf22.jpg


Because of the Archer experience I did not install an autopilot in the RV-6A - big mistake.  After a few very demanding instrument approaches I talked to Jim Younkin and bought a TruTrak Pictorial Pilot and Altrak (heading and altitude hold) to make things more reasonable to handle in IMC.

The RV-6A is fast and fits my needs perfectly but we loved the Red Bird and I flew it for more than 4,000 PIC hours. The pilot skill requirements are much less than the RV-6A, it is more durable and will handle your family requirements (4 place) if you stop the reproduction business.

Bob Axsom
 
Last edited:
Pipe dreams, that's what this thread is about.

Do yourself a favor and forget about hauling your family to grandma's in a small airplane and settle on something that suits your personal flying needs without exposing your family to the risk of small plane transportation.

The are many NTSB reports of entire families being wiped out in small airplanes. Just recently, a doctor took off from Spirit here in St. Louis in is SR22 and took his young daughter with him to an early grave. He supposedly was an excellent pilot. His wife and older daughter survived due to other commitments that morning.

I recall a Velocity builder heading off to grandma's from Florida to New Jersey for Thanksgiving some years back. He and his wife and two kids did not complete the trip, they are all dead.

General aviation does not have a good track record for safe transportation of families. If you want to live to see your grandkids find another way to travel as a family.

Wow...that's the same as saying, "If you fly GA, you WILL DIE!" You might, but, like the previous poster said, you may die in a car as well...or SCUBA diving, or hiking, or running, or sitting in your chair at work. It's all about risk tolerance. If you truly believe that taking the family flying will lead all to an early grave, why go flying in the first place, even solo? That'll lead you to an early grave and deprive them of their loved one.
 
I had a Mooney. Loved the **** out of it. But am building a 10. It will be as basic as I can make it.if lucky a used 430 and used steam gauges. For a few hundred bucks I can have all the moving map map I need on my ipad. Might paint it with latex paint and a roller- whatever.

I can still fly an ILS with needles if needed.

Will smile every time I do my own condition inspection. Never got out of an annual in the Mooney for less than 3-5 grand and that was ten years ago.

I won't win any prizes at Oshkosh and will suffer big panel envy so I will hide it in the north forty or something and use an assumed name so nobody will know its mine. But it wil fly just as good as anybody else's that tip the scales north of a quarter mil.

At least that is current plan...

And of course should I chose I can spend whatever I want to upgrade whenever some money starts burning a hole in my pocket or I win the lottery.

YMMV
 
...Do yourself a favor and forget about hauling your family to grandma's in a small airplane and settle on something that suits your personal flying needs without exposing your family to the risk of small plane transportation...


Funny, I built a house and hangar on an airport just so I could increase my family's exposure to small airplane transportation. If I could figure out a way to fly to work or to the shopping mall, I'd do it!
 
One thing you may want to consider is value

1 - If you arbitrarily skimp on everything and are still motivated to take it to completion you may not end up with the most value for you output.

2 - If you buy sophisticated glass panel avionics that seem great now it will be subject to much more value loss as the state of the art and the single source specialty company business cycle plays out.

Bob Axsom
 
Seem to have touched a sensitive subject.....

Wow...that's the same as saying, "If you fly GA, you WILL DIE!" You might, but, like the previous poster said, you may die in a car as well...or SCUBA diving, or hiking, or running, or sitting in your chair at work. It's all about risk tolerance. If you truly believe that taking the family flying will lead all to an early grave, why go flying in the first place, even solo? That'll lead you to an early grave and deprive them of their loved one.

Ron,

You missed the point of the message - and so did the moderator who deleted it.

The flying we do in experimental airplanes is all about risk management. That's how we stay alive and keep on doing it. This is risky business whether you believe it or not. And what makes it such a target for the feds is the fact that it does kill innocent persons now and then.

My point is quite simple, I do not believe exposing children (who have no say in the matter as to the risk) is good idea no matter how well the risk is managed. Adults (wives, girl friends, and all others) can think and make decisions for themselves. Kids do not have that choice. Consenting adults can do their thing ad infinitum - I could not care less.

Yes, I have given kids rides in the past but I don't sleep well after doing it and have discontinued it. Some here minimize the risk of this effort, I choose not to.

To each their own, I have no more to say on this subject.

PS The RV-10 is a wonderful airplane as are all Vans airplanes. :)
 
Last edited:
You missed the point of the message - and so did the moderator who deleted it.

David, sorry to see your post gone and I have no idea why your post was deleted.

I found it thought provoking even though many disagree with it. Guess I'm the one complaining about moderation this time.......hope it was just a server error or something.... :confused:
 
Last edited:
...You missed the point of the message...

...My point is quite simple, I do not believe exposing children (who have no say in the matter as to the risk) is good idea no matter how well the risk is managed...

I fully agree that personal flying is a relatively risky way to travel, but risk is a personal decision - not an absolute. In this case, your post, while thought provoking, is still simply your personal opinion - nothing more. It has as much "weight" as a Hollywood star commenting on the ozone layer.

While you may not choose to subject kids to a light aircraft ride, it is a bit harsh to condemn (even if indirectly) another persons choice to use their -10 as the family truckster
 
Last edited:
An RV-10 can be built for less than $100K

Bought a partially completed fuselage/empinage.
Slow build wings
Used engine (400 hours since Lycoming overhaul) -235 HP with prop
Used dual Horizon HX
Used trutrak Digiflight II VSGV
Demo Garmin 430W
Used SL-30.
Used PMA-8000 audio panel

No paint yet. That may put me over the $100k level.
Flew it to OshKosh from the west coast this year. On to Charleston SC and back at 150Kts True airspeed.
What a great machine!
 
I've owned three certifieds and the Socata was my favorite.
Very ergonomic and easy to maintain. A rare TB200 would fit the OP bill nicely.

However, once having had a taste of general aviation without lawyers, I will never go back.

I'll be under 150k in my RV10 with a BPE build up, A/C, and full Dynon Skyview.

I saved money by buying my emp and wing kits used, (but untouched), and a used G430.
 
Wow, a ton of posts. Thanks for all the input.
I have a confession.... I love to read Bob's posts. If I can only follow him.

So, I have been looking at a lot of planes. There are so many versions of 4-place certified planes but none really match the speed and versatility of the -10.
A few are nice and make the numbers, but then they will have a issue I can't live with. Like the rear spar on the Lancair's making the rear seats more like a rear doggy bed. :) or the rear facing seats on the sportsman 2+2.

You would think there would be more planes that fit my seemingly standard mission.

I think the 180 or 182 best fits the mission, if not including the -10. But reviewing the certified blogs has got me scared of the $20k annual. Not sure i could go back to a panel that came out of the seventies after the nice panels of experimentals.

Seems it comes down to the 182 or -10. But it is a trade of paying now or later.

I just can't believe it al comes back to the -10. Makes me feel the GA aircraft world is really small.

So, any one want to sell me a -10 kit at a good price!:)
 
A 10 it is!!

Sounds like you are selling yourself a 10 and a 10 it is.
The truth about 4 place production airplanes is that many are simply not true 4 place airplanes that is why your choices are so limited when you compare them to a true 4 place RV-10. I agree with what has been said about the Cessna 182,
it is a sturdy 4 place, baggage and full fuel kind of plane.
Believe what you read in the blogs about your annuals and certified parts and that is only getting worse as those airplanes age.
Building your 10 may not be on top of your favorite list of things to do but it quickly develops into a passion and you will gain invaluable knowledge and understanding of your airplane.
My first annual cost me nothing and just to make me feel better I installed a new set of automotive spark plugs for a grand total of less than $30 dollars, try that on your bargain spam can.
As to your question, Vans aircraft sells kits at a very good price and since I am the one who told you about it, let them know that I refer you to to them:)
I'll donate the referral credit to VAF.
 
Duane, you are my hero man. You beat me in cost efficiency, and I thought I was doing pretty good.

Bought a partially completed fuselage/empinage.
Slow build wings
Used engine (400 hours since Lycoming overhaul) -235 HP with prop
Used dual Horizon HX
Used trutrak Digiflight II VSGV
Demo Garmin 430W
Used SL-30.
Used PMA-8000 audio panel

No paint yet. That may put me over the $100k level.
Flew it to OshKosh from the west coast this year. On to Charleston SC and back at 150Kts True airspeed.
What a great machine!
 
No hero here

Thanks for the compliment Andy.

I enjoyed the journey very much. Scrounging good used parts kept me out of trouble and on VAF almost every day.

Building was fun, but I am really enjoying flying now.
 
How 'bout mine?

I've owned two seaters, four seaters and my 310 would hold 5.

Yesterday, I made the final payment on my -10...wooohooo...free and clear and absolutely no intention of parting with her.

If you're not convinced that you should mortgage whatever it takes to own one, then it's not for you.

Consider...4 adults weighing 330 lbs per couple, four soft bags with clothes, and a big laptop, full fuel, travelling from Key West, AND truing 201 MPH at 8,000' in the rain, IFR to home.

Best,
 
I owned a Wheeler Express S-90 [1995]. It's a very slick looking plane.
Between 60 & 100 flying (based on FAA DB search). Limited mkt.
Sales prices are less than RV-10. TCO for me was higher than -10.
Finding fiberglas experience to work on them is a chore. Most A&Ps prefer AL.

Darrel Peterson @ Composite Aircraft Technologies has the molds, etc.
Mine weighed 500 lbs more than my RV-10. (2100# vs 1600#)
I was getting about 161 Kts WOT. Darrel claims to get 180 Kts @ WOT.
Darrel has an RG model as well that is reported to be speedier.
Carrying & fuel capacity are superior to the RV-10, but did not operate @ limits.
Range was good (92 gals @ 15 gph). Miss that aspect compared to -10.
Older models have door on co-pilot side; new has two gull wing doors.

Now comfortably retired to academia [WMU - CoA] as a gate plane.
 
Sounds like you have narrowed your decision, but I thought I'd share this neat old Viking sales video anyway. There is some great flying in this one- and today's lawyers would have a field day!
 
Last edited:
I'm surprised a Bonanza wasn't mentioned.

Lots of Bonanza talk...

I had listed it as one of the airplanes I looked at in comparison.

Having about 200 hours of Bonanza time, you're right on all accounts. Comfort, speed (especially with a 550!), etc. It's a gem.

However like you mentioned:

TSO'd avionics. Have you looked at what an attitude gyro, specific to the Bonanza 8 degree panel costs?!? Plus any retrofit for glass will eliminate all the experimental stuff. $$$

Maintnance. Owner assisted annuals can be done for under $1000, which isn't bad (RV-10 annual is $0 though). Start tacking on hit list items, and replacement parts and one annual can nullify any savings you may have realized over a -10. Anything with "Beechcraft" stamped on it is already 30% more.

Something not mentioned, insurance. Not a cheap plane to insure on a low time pilot.

Unless you happen to pick a jewel of a V-tail (or even a 36) for a steal, the cost of ownership over time as the annuals, AD's, refurb, etc add up.... I just don't see how you're going to come out ahead of the -10. Performance is about even although the 10 does have an edge there too unless you want/need to haul 5 or 6 people.

I love the Bo, but for a regular use family hauler, I can't find a way to make it work money wise over the long term unless you want to get a much older G/P/S 35.

If money wasn't a factor however, I'd have a V-35 tricked out by D'Shannon with an IO-550 and a glass panel of some sort in a heartbeat!
 
Insurance thing is a myth.. :) I can almost pay for my annual on the Bonanza just with the difference in insurance compared to a typical RV-10 quote. I hate to see this misinformation be spread around when no facts are known.

you should count on at least $1000 MORE for an RV-10 insurance.

Not trying to sway you away from the -10.. it's for the most part the best choice... but decisions are best made when actual facts are taken into account.. not misinformation.

PS. Attitude gyro was $595 when we replaced it (trade-in back to Sigma-tec).
 
Back
Top