Build the RV you want

[humptybump]

There is a pretty familiar answer to the question "which RV should I build". For the most part, it comes down to goals and priorities.

I was curious about some of the performance differences between the various models. To that end, I went to the factory website and copied down data from a bunch of pages and here is what I found ...

click either image for larger version

The RV-3, RV-12, RV-14, and RV-10 have been omitted since they do not have a 160HP benchmark provided by Vans Aircraft.

This post is not meant to be a debate about individual aircraft getting better numbers or worse. Nor is it about some airframes take bigger engines. This is just meant to show that Vans Aircraft are pretty similar in the performance category.

[WingsOnWheels]

but, but, but.....you forgot the all-important RV-6

[hydroguy2]

you should add take-off and landing distance, also approximate stall speeds

[Buggsy2]

It always seemed strange to me that the -9, supposedly best for cruising, has the smallest tanks of the modern two-seaters and the poorest mpg.

[humptybump]

RV-6 is missing since Vans Aircraft no longer lists the data for it.

Interesting suggestion to add the official factory T/O and Landing numbers. I'll see what I can do. (updated original post)

One of the statements for why the RV-9 was introduced was to allow smaller, more frugal engines. Very few build them that way. Similarly, how many RV-8's are build with an O320 ?

[Omega232Devils]

Here is the RV-6 link Glen! It's in the archives!

http://vansaircraft.com/public/rv6perf.htm



Dan

[DonFromTX]

But worst omission of all - was the RV12!

Originally Posted by humptybump

There is a pretty familiar answer to the question "which RV should I build". For the most part, it comes down to goals and priorities.

I was curious about some of the performance differences between the various models. To that end, I went to the factory website and copied down data from a bunch of pages and here is what I found ...

The RV-3, RV-12, RV-14, and RV-10 have been omitted since they do not have a 160HP benchmark provided by Vans Aircraft.

This post is not meant to be a debate about individual aircraft getting better numbers or worse. Nor is it about some airframes take bigger engines. This is just meant to show that Vans Aircraft are pretty similar in the performance category.

[humptybump]

Originally Posted by DonFromTX

But worst omission of all - was the RV12!

It was not omitted for any other reason than Vans Aircraft does not provide data for a 160HP configuration.

"Build the RV you want"

[humptybump]

Thanks Dan. Added the RV-6 to the table in the OP.

The more data I add, the more amazed I am at how similar the performance is across the platforms and yet how diverse the target audience for the platforms. There are some pretty smart people over at Vans Aircraft !

[roee]

The RV-4/6/7/8 are aerodynamically very similar to each other (and to a lesser degree the -9 as well), so it should be no surprise that given the same engine their performance and efficiency numbers are also very similar.

That's why the choice does usually come down to personal preferences and priorities (and unending debates) about the design differences and their relative merits. Among them, approved engine choices, top speed, fuel capacity, cockpit configuration, landing gear configuration, and construction methods (old school RV-4/6 versus matched hole RV-7/8/9). And of course, primer!