What's new
Van's Air Force

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

RV-6 should I buy one?

Superman1s

Superman1s

Member
Hello everyone! First time posting! I am a potential new pilot, taking my ch ride next month, scary! All of my training has been in a Citabria 7GCBC. My friend has a friend with an RV-6 coming up for sale. I know the RV is way faster than my Citabria. Will the RV be too much to handle? Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated...
 
Buy it. You will have a good base skill set from the Citabria. Get some transition training and you will be good to go. Expect Mikes obligatory welcome to follow....
 
Hi Todd,

Welcome!

If you're training in a Citabria, you should have no problems in a -6. For perspective, I did almost all of my PPL training in a Luscombe 8A. My 1st homebuilt, right after getting my ticket, was a Thorp T-18. The Thorp is a great flying plane, but it is definitely 'hotter' than an RV-x. Its control harmony isn't as good, and can develop a higher sink rate at low speeds than the RV's. I had no trouble at all transitioning to the Thorp, which, due to circumstances I had to do without any dual in the Thorp. Moving from the Thorp to an RV-4 was a piece of cake.

Get some time in the right seat of the -6. Just be prepared for significantly lighter control forces. This isn't a bad thing; it's just different. If you're prepared for it, you shouldn't have any problems. I did a lot of research (reading, talking to owners) before flying the Thorp for the 1st time, and that seemed to help prepare me for the different handling characteristics.

FWIW,

Charlie
 
PPL to RV9A

I was where you are about a decade ago. I got my PPL in Cessna 150, and immediately transitioned into a 9A. If you had a good instructor, it won't be an issue as long as you get some quality transition training. If you had a poor instructor like I did, plan on spending 15+ hours with a pilot very proficient in RVs (doesn't have to be an instructor). It probably took me longer than most before I was no longer 'behind' the RV and landing it consistently as the piloting thing doesn't come naturally to me, but now I'm glad that was my path and thankful I didn't have to spend hundreds of hours in a less-capable airplane.
 
The published climb rates are crazy! Must feel like a rocket. I'm used to 800FPM on a cool day at sea level...
I fly out of Gillespie Field (KSEE), San Diego area!

I will let you know if I purchase!

Thank you all for your insight!!!
 
If you can handle the crosswinds on 27 at Gillespie in the Citabria, you will marvel at the ease of which the 6 will be in the same, or worse, conditions!
I am excited for you.
 
go do it. in the year of the 30 year celebration of the rv6 design, that is this year, buying one would be very cool. i like mine and by looking at your bio i would say you can handle a 6. get some good training and start filling those tanks. it is addictive. welcome to the best family around. =VAF=. get learning on posting some pics too. we want to see what you are and will buy. ill be watching.
P1020294%20copy.jpg

20160217_102950.jpg
 
Back in '97, I bought and flew home my RV-3 with a wet-ink tailwheel endorsement and 70hrs TT. It is doable, but respect it.

Relative to what you are used to. It climbs and flys notably faster, it is more nimble and will feel more "connected" (on rails).

Being faster, you need to have skills, experience and judgement to stay ahead of it. This isn't some huge gulf in your flying ethos, it actually comes naturally and quickly.

Transition training is a strong recommendation for any hour new to RV pilot.

Cautions for RVs specifically; relative to aircraft tailored for low-hour pilots the landing gear is springy and unforgiving. Of special concern for tail wheel RVs. Your great grandfathers Champ lands 3-point at or near stall AoA. Stall angle for an RV is _FAR_ beyond the 3-point angle. Beware that you can easily land tail first and that has a certain 'bucking bronco' feel to it as you spring from tail to mains to tail to mains a few times.

Good luck!
 
JonJay said:
If you can handle the crosswinds on 27 at Gillespie in the Citabria, you will marvel at the ease of which the 6 will be in the same, or worse, conditions!
I am excited for you.
Click to expand...

27 crosswinds are my worst nightmare! The worst iv'e encountered were at Brown Field (SDM)
 
BruceMe said:
Back in '97, I bought and flew home my RV-3 with a wet-ink tailwheel endorsement and 70hrs TT. It is doable, but respect it.

Relative to what you are used to. It climbs and flys notably faster, it is more nimble and will feel more "connected" (on rails).

Being faster, you need to have skills, experience and judgement to stay ahead of it. This isn't some huge gulf in your flying ethos, it actually comes naturally and quickly.

Transition training is a strong recommendation for any hour new to RV pilot.

Cautions for RVs specifically; relative to aircraft tailored for low-hour pilots the landing gear is springy and unforgiving. Of special concern for tail wheel RVs. Your great grandfathers Champ lands 3-point at or near stall AoA. Stall angle for an RV is _FAR_ beyond the 3-point angle. Beware that you can easily land tail first and that has a certain 'bucking bronco' feel to it as you spring from tail to mains to tail to mains a few times.

Good luck!
Click to expand...

Good info, sounds like wheel landing is the landing of choice!? By the looks of the tail wheel mount design it would be springy! I see many go-around's in my future!
 
Superman1s said:
Good info, sounds like wheel landing is the landing of choice!? By the looks of the tail wheel mount design it would be springy! I see many go-around's in my future!
Click to expand...

I think the gear post needs a bit of clarification. It might not take the abuse of a C150/152, but it's still pretty tough (the nose gears on the 6A/9A might be somewhat of an exception). And the only time you'll have a problem with 'bucking' is if you land already fully stalled. The -4, at least, can actually be landed tail first in between 3 point & full stall, 'rolling' the tailwheel on, and settling onto the mains.

Wheelies are fine, but there's no reason to avoid either style landing. Practice both. :) Conditions (or preference) can define which to choose. CG & flap position can make a bit of difference in which the plane 'prefers' (at least with the -4, which I have the most time in), but the pilot is still the boss.

Just ask the owner for a ride, & once you get to play with the stick/rudder, even in the air, you'll realize that you won't have any trouble with the plane. In my opinion (FWIW), you're in a better position to transition than a guy with lots of time in factory planes. You're still in training mode, and trying to learn. Guys with higher time in heavier feeling, slower reacting planes often have a harder time adjusting.

Charlie
 
Todd, there are MANY RV's in San Diego, Gillespie and Ramona especially. Several at Montgomery, too.

If you know someone at SEE with an RV, go up for a flight. If you want to come to Ramona, I'm sure we can get you up in an RV. PM me.
 
Todd, I bought my RV6A back in April and just completed my PPL at the end
of September in a 172. I started my transition training last Monday. This
airplane is amazing. I feel connected to it. The handling and manueverability
is nimble and quick. I found it fairly easy to fly and to land. The only thing
that caught me by surprise was the speed, but after about 10mins of flying,
along with a couple of stalls and steep turns I was right at home. Landings
in this bird are easier to manage than the 172. Fly the airplane to the runway.
when you are about 2-3 feet above pull the power and let the plane settle.
My first 4 landings were very good.
So long story but hopefully it offers some encouragment. Find a good RV6/6A.
Get the 180hr and a constant speed prop and you will love life, especially in
higher density altitudes. Best of luck!
 
Superman1s said:
Good info, sounds like wheel landing is the landing of choice!? By the looks of the tail wheel mount design it would be springy! I see many go-around's in my future!
Click to expand...

Many RV'rs prefer wheel landings, and I have to say, I personally feel they are easier. But 3-point is fine and I prefer them for getting the slowest/shortest landing role. Just be aware that it can land tail first.

One thing I should say... I enjoy landing an RV more than any other airplane I've ever flow. It's an addictive combination of hyper-bouncy landing gear yet totally honest flying (especially around stall). While in the air she just begs you to make it flawless every time, and yet at the moment of truth you almost always come up ever so slightly short and skip and skitter. Every once in a while... you time everything right and magic happens! Who needs golf!?
 
Last edited:
rv7charlie said:
I think the gear post needs a bit of clarification. It might not take the abuse of a C150/152, but it's still pretty tough (the nose gears on the 6A/9A might be somewhat of an exception). And the only time you'll have a problem with 'bucking' is if you land already fully stalled. The -4, at least, can actually be landed tail first in between 3 point & full stall, 'rolling' the tailwheel on, and settling onto the mains.

Wheelies are fine, but there's no reason to avoid either style landing. Practice both. :) Conditions (or preference) can define which to choose. CG & flap position can make a bit of difference in which the plane 'prefers' (at least with the -4, which I have the most time in), but the pilot is still the boss.

Just ask the owner for a ride, & once you get to play with the stick/rudder, even in the air, you'll realize that you won't have any trouble with the plane. In my opinion (FWIW), you're in a better position to transition than a guy with lots of time in factory planes. You're still in training mode, and trying to learn. Guys with higher time in heavier feeling, slower reacting planes often have a harder time adjusting.

Charlie
Click to expand...

Charley, thanks so much! I feel much more comfortable about landings after reading your post. Thank you!
 
gmohr said:
Todd, I bought my RV6A back in April and just completed my PPL at the end
of September in a 172. I started my transition training last Monday. This
airplane is amazing. I feel connected to it. The handling and manueverability
is nimble and quick. I found it fairly easy to fly and to land. The only thing
that caught me by surprise was the speed, but after about 10mins of flying,
along with a couple of stalls and steep turns I was right at home. Landings
in this bird are easier to manage than the 172. Fly the airplane to the runway.
when you are about 2-3 feet above pull the power and let the plane settle.
My first 4 landings were very good.
So long story but hopefully it offers some encouragment. Find a good RV6/6A.
Get the 180hr and a constant speed prop and you will love life, especially in
higher density altitudes. Best of luck!
Click to expand...

Great info! The R6 I am lookng at has 180hp with CS prop with 6 pack layout, no glass! Iv'e been using ForeFlight..
Thanks for posting!
 
BruceMe said:
Many RV'rs prefer wheel landings, and I have to say, I personally feel they are easier. But 3-point is fine and I prefer them for getting the slowest/shortest landing role. Just be aware that it can land tail first.

One thing I should say... I enjoy landing an RV more than any other airplane I've ever flow. It's an addictive combination of hyper-bouncy landing gear yet totally honest flying (especially around stall). While in the air she just begs you to make it flawless every time, and yet at the moment of truth you almost always come up ever so slightly short and skip and skitter. Every once in a while... you time everything right and magic happens! Who needs golf!?
Click to expand...

Thank you!
 
I am going for a ride in a R7 with side by seating and an R8 tandem either today or tomorrow. The owner who owns both planes said he prefers the 8 because it feels like war bird, and visibility is better when taxing. I am looking at a side by side R6. I think my wife will enjoy flying next to me rather then being in the back seat. If I was by myself i'd go for the tandem. :rolleyes:
 
The RV-6 is a great choice because they are excellent airplanes that have somewhat lost favor in the market compared to the newer -7. If you are going for a flying airplane, then a well built -6 is a great value. That said, if you prefer a tandem, figure that part out with your spouse first. Not all wives need to be next to you. After spending plenty of time in both configurations, mine strongly prefers her "nest" in the back. Put that issue to bed before you pull the trigger.
 
Superman1s said:
I think my wife will enjoy flying next to me rather then being in the back seat. If I was by myself i'd go for the tandem. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I was single when I started my build so I went with the 8. I love it! Wife 2.0 has been in the airplane a total of about 7 times so I'm still thrilled with my choice. If your wife will fly with you a lot, there's no doubt the side by side models are preferable........to the wives! :D
 
While there is no doubt that the overwhelming percentage of wives prefer the side by side, that is of no consequence if your wife strongly prefers the tandems. This is not something you can figure out by popularity polls. It's a very individual choice, and should be carefully considered.
 
Before I pulled the trigger, I arranged for my wife take a couple flights in a Citabria with another flight instructor so she could sample GA flying, a tandem, and basic acro. This was time and money well spent; we now enjoy our RV-7. Marital harmony is bliss!
 
I've owned a -3, -4 and now the -6. I haven't flown the 6 yet, but I'm pretty confident I'll get my wife up more often now. My plan is to later get an old simple O-290 hand prop -3 project for solo fun. I have room in the hangar/budget. Thinking like 10k.
 
Flew an RV-6 yesterday, right seat, very awkward! Weather was not cooperating, very bumpy with crosswinds 40-30 degrees, 10 gusting to 17kts. The plane has a 0360 180hp CS prop. Plenty of power for sure! Controls were sensitive but too sensitive. Slowing her down on approach is definitely more challenging than the Citabria, very slippery aircraft. Below 100 with 20 degrees of flaps it felt a bit mushy. Hopefully the airport elevation of over 5k ft and weather conditions had a lot to do with the mushiness! I did not check the density altitude, temp was around 70.
Cockpit space is small but okay. Ground maneuvering was a awesome. Harder to see over the nose than Ciabria for sure, should have been sitting on a phone book, ha ha! I'm 5'10", if I stretched I could just see the RW centerline. The cockpit gauges are all steam. Would like to have glass but sure if its worth the investment, comments please! Aircraft does auto pilot which works off of a Garmin 296. First time using CS prop. It was a strange sensation when I decreased the throttle, hearing the motor rpm's remain the same. Overall I think the RV could be a fun plane once I had time in it! Any comments would be appreciated, thanks!
 
You will have to get used to the control feel differences between it and the Citrabria, but it should not feel "too sensitive" and certainly not "mushy" when under 100mph. These are symptoms of the trailing edge of the ailerons not being formed correctly if I had to guess.
This is easy to check and relatively easy to fix. It is a very common problem and lots of flying aircraft out there being piloted by folks who don't know the difference.

Even two up at 5000ft, you should have solid positive control and control pressure/sensitivity should not change dramatically between cruise and slow flight. It will feel a bit different, but not from those two extremes, even in those conditions.

As far as visibility, the 6 is the worst in the fleet, but it still isn't bad compared to, oh, my Bucker! I am also 5'10".
 
The RV-6 is a wonderful airplane to fly. I have really enjoyed mine since I bought it back in April 2012, and have flown it to Oshkosh 5 years in a row, and to Johnson Creek Idaho twice.

Unfortunately all good things must come to an end, and I must now sell it to pay for some upcoming medical expenses. I'll be posting an ad here on VAF shortly with the details. It's one of the prettiest, and best-constructed examples of an RV-6 on the entire planet, IMHO.

IMG_7317.JPG
 
JonJay said:
As far as visibility, the 6 is the worst in the fleet, but it still isn't bad compared to, oh, my Bucker! I am also 5'10".
Click to expand...

I'm only 5'7" and can see out of the RV-6 more than good enough. It is the worst in the fleet for visibility, but not really a problem at all even for a short guy like me.
 
Neal@F14 said:
The RV-6 is a wonderful airplane to fly. I have really enjoyed mine since I bought it back in April 2012, and have flown it to Oshkosh 5 years in a row, and to Johnson Creek Idaho twice.

Unfortunately all good things must come to an end, and I must now sell it to pay for some upcoming medical expenses. I'll be posting an ad here on VAF shortly with the details. It's one of the prettiest, and best-constructed examples of an RV-6 on the entire planet, IMHO.

IMG_7317.JPG
Click to expand...

It is a beauty Neal. I am very sorry you have to let it go. It will find a good home quickly no doubt.
 
Neal@F14 said:
I'm only 5'7" and can see out of the RV-6 more than good enough. It is the worst in the fleet for visibility, but not really a problem at all even for a short guy like me.
Click to expand...

Actually height should not be a factor. It's all in the cushions.
I'm 5' 4" and Ann is 5' 2" and we have no problem at all.
Another small factor is the tailwheel. The Aviation Products tail wheel raises the tail a little. This helps noticeably.
 
Mel said:
Actually height should not be a factor. It's all in the cushions.
I'm 5' 4" and Ann is 5' 2" and we have no problem at all.
Another small factor is the tailwheel. The Aviation Products tail wheel raises the tail a little. This helps noticeably.
Click to expand...

Good info! Speaking of the tailwheel, the plane I flew did not have a pneumatic wheel?! Is this the case for all RV's?
 
Superman1s said:
Good info! Speaking of the tailwheel, the plane I flew did not have a pneumatic wheel?! Is this the case for all RV's?
Click to expand...

Pneumatic tail wheels are heavy. I think you will find few if any on RVs.
The Aviation Products tailwheel I speak of uses the standard wheel, it has a slightly taller fork.
 
Hello again friends! Well it appears I lost out on the RV-6, N727FB. So now I am looking for another aircraft. Either a 6, 6a or 7, 7a. I have found a few on Barstormers. Some of them have Lyc 320 with FP prop. N727FB has a Lyc 360 with CS prop. Is there a big difference if I go with the 320 with FP?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top