Which RV?: Need opinion - Page 2

Robert Anglin · #11 10-20-2017, 04:58 PM

I do not have a dog in this fight. As we have an 8, but you answer your own question by asking for two things. Travel and cost to operate. Both the 12 and the 9 are very good aircraft, I have friends with both. The 9 however can hold more fuel and cart a heaver load at a very nice pace. Also the operating cost of the 9 will be comparable to the 12. When I talk to my friend with a 12 they like to skip over the part were an 8 with an IO-360 can make 115-120 Kts. burning 5.2-5.6 Gph. When I talk to my friends with a 9 with an O-320 with a fixed pitch prop, they can beat me by a few tenths. All the time knowing that they can burn regular UL from the corner gas station. Yes you will have to drive some rivets, but almost anyone can learn that with a little practice.
Pick the airplane that make you happy, it is you that will have to live with it.
I know this may not help, but I hope it does. Yours, R.E.A. III # 80888

2johns · #12 10-20-2017, 05:02 PM

I have been flying my RV12 since 2010. It is a wonderful plane. It is about as fast as my 1956 Cessna 182 was and is much better at passing the gas stations. The advantage over most other home built planes is that it is truly plug and play. The 912 Rotax has been trouble free.

Nedimbek · #13 10-21-2017, 08:17 PM

Thank you for sharing your experience with me.
I haven't seen one but from the pictures -12 is a very nice looking airplane. I am reviewing construction plans for about a year and I found that it is very appealing to build one. Very straight forwards with almost nothing that I can not deal with. Now with the new injection engine option it even got better. I would love to build one.
However, on the other hand the re-sale value and flexibility on the cost of -9 (I am assuming I can save around $10k by going with a used mid-time engine and a simple panel) is something to seriously consider.
Still can't make up my mind. I think a visit to Ralph Inkster's hangar will clear a lot of thing in my mind.
I will share my decision when I have one.

Then I will have millions of question to ask in this forum.

tgmillso · #14 10-21-2017, 08:55 PM

Another one without a dog in this fight as I am building a -7, however I have a couple of items that may be deal makers or breakers.
Sliding canopy: with the super tracks on the -9 this gives you amazing access to the baggage compartment, plus if you live or travel to windy locations, the -12 tip up makes for a great sail. I know someone with a -12 who regularly complains about this. He bought the -12 because of medical restrictions, but I know deep down he wanted something faster in cruise with a slider.
Lycoming engines: if you like these, then I guess the -9 is the one to have.
Tail wheel option: Don't line castering nose wheels? Nor do I. The -9 gives you the option of the tail wheel.
Resale: From my perspective, the -12 was built to fit an artificially created market segment. If you don't have that in your region, and as medical restrictions are becoming more realistic, I think this may impact some people's desire to own an LSA, especially when the -9 has amazing high altitude cruise performance combined with equally as mind bending STOL capabilities.
Build difficulty: Get the QB -9 and most of the tough stuff has already been completed like the longerons and the tanks, plus QB aircraft generally attract a higher resale value.
My 0.02
Now back to building the -7... which should probably have been the 9...
Tom.

bruceh · #15 10-22-2017, 10:11 AM

Other considerations about going towards a -9 vs. a -12: With the -12, you really don't have a whole lot of choices with the panel/engine/prop. Choices like these will really slow you down, since everything has to be researched, decided, bought, installed, etc. The -9's cost will probably be higher if you start upgrading everything like I did. Van's estimator is way off!

Having built a -9, it is going to take longer than a -12, since you are using solid rivets. I don't think either of them are "hard" to build, just a matter of how much time it takes to get the job done. I spent pretty much every night and weekend working on mine and it took 4.5 years. I did have some longer breaks in there for business travel and other family commitments. Enjoyed every minute of the build process, so don't take that as a negative.

I've put almost 500 hours on my -9A in less than 4 years and it is a delight to fly. My hourly costs over that time for fuel are just under $27/hour, and it gets me 150K cruise speeds.

Nedimbek · #16 10-22-2017, 12:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bruceh

Other considerations about going towards a -9 vs. a -12: With the -12, you really don't have a whole lot of choices with the panel/engine/prop. Choices like these will really slow you down, since everything has to be researched, decided, bought, installed, etc. The -9's cost will probably be higher if you start upgrading everything like I did. Van's estimator is way off!

Having built a -9, it is going to take longer than a -12, since you are using solid rivets. I don't think either of them are "hard" to build, just a matter of how much time it takes to get the job done. I spent pretty much every night and weekend working on mine and it took 4.5 years. I did have some longer breaks in there for business travel and other family commitments. Enjoyed every minute of the build process, so don't take that as a negative.

I've put almost 500 hours on my -9A in less than 4 years and it is a delight to fly. My hourly costs over that time for fuel are just under $27/hour, and it gets me 150K cruise speeds.

Those are exactly similar to my thoughts. It is clear that building a -12 takes less time with almost no struggling with specialized items such as panel and fwf, for example: baffling, wiring etc. In -12 choices are made and assembly procedures put into the manual. There is a lot to learn to install the components in a -9 and professional help like ordering a custom built panel may be costly.

A -12 can be built approximately in a year however I am not able to finance the entire project in such a short time. Spreading the project over the years can help on that matter. Instead of waiting to save more money to order the next kit, I can be happily working on my slow build -9.

I don't think that I will have problem with the sheet metal work. Not aircraft related but I have fair amount of experience in this area. It seems almost all tasks in building a -12 can be done by one man but -9 will needs serious help of a second person in some stages of the build. After all you will end up with a better aiplane with higher value.

I think this decision making process will take more time. It seems I have some sort of understanding of the differences but my mind is going back and forth when it comes to choose.

scottmillhouse · #17 10-22-2017, 01:29 PM

I built a 9A, most of a 7 and recently my 12. Took 7 years and 2500 hours for the 9A and 15 months (with 4 down months) and 1000 hours for the 12. If you want to fly build the 12. If you want to learn new skills and are in no hurry to fly you can't go wrong with the 9. I've taken my 12 everywhere I took the 9. Limited to taking 20% longer, needing to stop more often for gas (but I have a 2 1/2 hour bladder any way) and with 50# of luggage it is a solo plane for Oshkosh week camping. Comparably equipped build cost investment and resale return should also be comparable. You just can't build a 12 with an old engine and avionics like a 9 with plan to upgrade as you go unless you go EAB. Having a new engine with 2000 hours in front of it is a nice start.

tomkk · #18 10-22-2017, 01:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bruceh

... My hourly costs over that time for fuel are just under $27/hour, and it gets me 150K cruise speeds.

As a matter of curiosity, what do you include in your hourly cost for your -9A?

My -12 runs about $12.50/hr fuel only, $15/hr if I include maintenance costs over the 2 1/2 years I've been flying it (I don't include an engine overhaul/replacement set-aside in my maint cost). By far, my largest expense is the hanger and, secondarily, insurance. Frankly, those two dwarf my other costs and represent almost 80% of my flying cost.

bruceh · #19 10-22-2017, 03:46 PM

That is only my fuel costs. Hangar, insurance, oil, etc. not included at all in this number.

Dreamin9 · #20 10-25-2017, 03:42 PM

This past Thursday I flew my RV-9A O-320-160 (bought not built) from Buffalo, NY to Winter Haven, Fl.
First leg to Charlotte area was 3:20 with single digit headwind. Put 25 gal in 36 gal tanks. At 8500,TAS 153kt, 7.1GPH.
Second and last leg to Winter Have, zig zagging around traffic, restricted areas, showers, was 2:50 with neutral headwind.
I was alone but could have carried two 170lb people and decent baggage under gross.

Resale? If you or your kids sell either of these, they will be lucky to get back what you put into materials.
No choices/decisions with the 12? Is that good? Might be nice to have options.
Time to build? Buy one already built, you will pay less overall and have some bucks left to customize.

If you go with the 12, make sure there?s a Rotax experienced mechanic near you, they are good engines but they are different.

Carl