LeeM_2000

LeeM_2000

Well Known Member
Hi all,

I am just past the "decided to build an RV" stage and am firmly in the "which model to build" and tool gathering/garage clearing stage. I have an RV-8 dream in my head, but would also like a 7 or a 7A. I am now trying to decide how much weight to assign the insurance premium costs. I have never owned an airplane and am not sure how much coverage to carry so I asked Avemco to quote me the worst case premiums for my ratings and experience in each the 8, 8A, 7, and 7A. The difference between tail and nose draggers was about $500. The difference between a 7 and an 8 and a 7A and 8A was about $1000 respectively with $2000 difference between a 7A and an 8.

Should I worry about this or what? I would be interested to hear the thoughts on whether you chose what to build based on insurance costs.

Thanks,
Lee
 
get other insurance quotes

I didn't find so much dependence on model for insurance quote. Certainly tailwheel versus trike, but -7 vs -8, I don't think you will find so much difference with other carriers.

Also, this is slightly off topic, but may help with your decision: I always loved sitting on centerline more. Most of my flying is in gliders, and I owned a Citabria for a while. Somehow, sitting off to the side just never felt as good.
HOWEVER, when I did my transition training with Mike Seager in the RV-7, I gotta say it is a very nice plane to fly, and the offset didn't really bother me (except that I habitually landed 4 ft right of centerline:eek: (I was sitting in the right seat for transition)

Anyway, just one datapoint to add to the mix, but even if you are a centerline kinda guy, you may like the -7 just fine.
 
scsmith said:
... in the RV-7 [...] the offset didn't really bother me (except that I habitually landed 4 ft right of centerline:eek: (I was sitting in the right seat for transition)
Click to expand...

In the RV-7 you're sitting at only about a 10" offset from the airplane's centerline. Hmm... So in the RV-8 do you typically land 3'2" to the right of the runway centerline? :p Kidding, kidding... a new sight picture in any different airplane can screw you up until you get used to it.

This thread has much potential to reignite the tail dragger vs. tri-gear wars, but I'll just say this. I didn't build a tri-gear because the insurance is cheaper, but I did build a tri-gear for some of the same reasons why the insurance is cheaper. Over and out :D
 
hydroguy2 said:
I decided to build what I wanted, not what the insurance agent wanted.
Click to expand...

This is what I will tell the guy who got me thinking about this insurance crud in the first place. :)

The question came up when one of my friends (an RV-7A builder) said something like, "have fun paying those insurance premiums for the tail dragger" after I mentioned that I was seriously considering an 8. I had not really even considered insurance costs before since I see that as a sunk hourly cost anyway (the more you fly, the cheaper it feels).
 
roee said:
This thread has much potential to reignite the tail dragger vs. tri-gear wars, but I'll just say this. I didn't build a tri-gear because the insurance is cheaper, but I did build a tri-gear for some of the same reasons why the insurance is cheaper. Over and out :D
Click to expand...

I definitely understand why they are cheaper, I am familiar with the war and I am completely neutral.
 
To answer your direct question - no, it did not. I built the airplane I wanted, and didn't worry about insurance costs. Of course, I have a lot of flying hours, and I only carry liability insurance, the cost difference was essentially zero (without those qualifying statements, the data is someone meaningless). But realistically speaking, if the difference is $500 per year, I'd suggest looking at all the operating costs you'll pay in a year. RV's are fun, fast fliers - your fuel costs will overshadow that difference pretty quickly.

Build the airplane you want - don't let a financial industry drive your dreams for you.

Paul
 
hydroguy2 said:
I decided to build what I wanted, not what the insurance agent wanted.
Click to expand...

I'll expand my reasoning for picking an 200hp RV-7. my other choices were RV-10 and then -9A

My mission is: fun, XC's, backcountry grass and wife sitting beside me.

RV-10 was well outside my budget, RV-9a is listed as ~15mph slower. My wife likes minimum time in route, so 15mph is 15mph.

as far as the nosewheel vs tailwheel concerns. I had 1 hr of TW time when I decided. Another RV owner told me, "don't worry about it." "if you can't learn to land a tailwheel RV properly, you probably shouldn't be landing any RV." I've got 50hrs TW now mostly Citabria. I did check on insurance a few years ago, the difference was <$400...the first year and once I get 100hrs in type it is less the $100 difference.

So there you go. In the overall picture, insurance is really no factor.
 
Nope

Pulled the trigger on an RV-7 vs 7A when I had 0 hours of tail wheel time - knowing it was going to be more expensive to insure (I had gotten quotes). I'm building the airplane I want. Now with about 27 hours of TW (3.5 in an RV), I don't regret my decision at all. This is not about sensible shoes . . . . . .
 
Lee,

The big spread is almost certainly due to your minimal experience in taildraggers. I learned to fly in a Luscombe & had to pay a $200 surcharge on the $600 existing policy. When I hit 50 hrs in the plane, the surcharge went away. The last time I asked for a comparison of rates between tri/tail RV's for me, the answer was 'no difference'. I'm not a particularly high-time pilot; I've got about 800 hrs tt, but all but around 30 hrs are in taildraggers.

I'd probably modify what others have said & say, evaluate your own flying needs & skillset, then pick your plane based on that. The insurance spread will go down fairly quickly, and it will always cost quite a bit more than coverage on a 'factory' plane, anyway.

Charlie
 
Don't mix dollars and dreams...

I chose to build an -8 without having ever been behind the controls of a tailwheel aircraft. My thinking was that if all of those farm boys from our Greatest Generation could learn to fly in them, then so could I. I also liked the idea of having the option down the road to fly some of the more "interesting" aircraft produced...let's be realistic...there isn't much to call "interesting" with the typical factory-produced tri-gear. While building, I secured my tailwheel endorsement in a Luscombe (Which was my first introduction to a truly "interesting" aircraft.) and then flew the Citabria and Cub a little bit. By the time that I was ready to fly my -8, I had a grand total of 150 hours total time, with less than 15 hours of tailwheel time in the book. I approached NationAir with my situation and they came back to me with a plan to make me "insurable". All they required was that I get 10 hours of RV transition training before my first flight. Those 10 hours were expensive, but well worth it. The RV is the most docile taildragger that I have flown to date, and I have no regrets building in line with my dreams rather than with my wallet...

I also vote for centerline seating...on final, it is like you are looking down a gunsight as you line up on the runway. Visibility is unreal.
 
LeeM_2000 said:
Hi all,

The difference between a 7 and an 8 and a 7A and 8A was about $1000 respectively with $2000 difference between a 7A and an 8.

Should I worry about this or what? I
Thanks,
Lee
Click to expand...

Yes you should be worried. Those spreads are whacked. Find another agent. Something is amiss.

In my unique case, yes insurance was a significant factor in choosing the S8 over the rocket.

Best,
 
I do about 2 a week. Difference in trike vs. tailwheel is minimal / difference in -7 vs. 8 vs. 4 vs. 6 is none. Ignore Avemco, they are always way out of whack, as Kahuna said.

If you've not even started building - don't think any more about it right now. The insurance market changes weekly and who knows what conditions might exist by the time you have a real airplane.

Then - pick ONE good agent and let them show you quotes from each insurer. I know a good one;)
 
Build the one

Build the one you want.
I like centerline and fly a 8. Good visibality, like someone said.
 
Jaypratt said:
Build the one you want.
I like centerline and fly a 8. Good visibality, like someone said.
Click to expand...

I'd have to have at least three different aircraft to get what I really want.

A side by side for flying with the wife, which I do most of the time. We fly lot's of cross country. Example, Yellowstone Park -- last weekend.

A centerline tail dragger for playing P-51 pilot ---- without the cost. (just love P-51s, and I've been up in one)

And an Aviat Husky (or similar) for real back country flying, in which an RV just isn't suited.

L.Adamson --- RV6A
 
RV insurance

While researching all the issues of building & flying an airplane, I talked to an
aviation insurance company (can't remember which one) and got a quote for the RV I was thinking of building.

He said the RV9A was a good choice with respect to obtaining insurance.

It did not really affect my choice but I was glad to hear those words.

Daver
-9A finish kit
 
Totally agree...

...build what you want. I am a low time pilot with no TW time as I write this but I want the taildragger so thats what I'm building. I know it will cost me a little more but as I get more time in type the prices go down. We're talking about $75,000 toys that eat $35/hour in Avgas and cost $300/month or more to hangar...does a few hundred dollars or even a few thousand dollars a year for operating costs make that much difference in the overall picture? On top of the fact that the insurance costs will go down as the experience adds up. Lets say you fly 100 hrs a yr...that extra insurance cost melts away to almost nothing. Build your dream...IMHO
 
Truly build what you want. The issue between nose gear v tail gear has always been a complete SILLY waste of time and bandwidth. Seriously a CHIMP could learn to land a tailwheel aircraft so agruing the skill levels needed is simply meaninless. Any one can learn to plant a taildragger in 5 hours or less. Recall - before tricycle gear was common, EVERYONE flew tail draggers. Big deal.

The ONLY deciding issue between conventional and tricycle is WHERE you want to land. Some folks are not as comfortable going into shorter grass fields, wet grass fields, undeveloped fields, et cetera, with tricycle gear. Particularly the RV nose gear. If outback flying is not your goal per say, then the trike would be fine...but others go to those places just fine in trikes. Experience is something you will build no matter which type you own.

The real issue you need to decide is whether you need a WIDE panel and intimate side-by-side seating, ala RV-7, or can live with a narrow panel and impersonal seating ala RV-8. Its one of the only real operational issues as far as base model choices. Will your wife or girlfriend or passenger be happy banished to the hole in the back, or will they want to be beside you? Will you need a massive expanse of panel for a bucket load of gadgets or will you be happy with the fighter like efficiency of a smaller panel? Some non-flyers WANT to be comforted by being part of the crew. Others are just as happy sitting in back, taking photos and doing their own thing. Take who you will fly regularly into account when choosing and consider the amount of junk you want to install.

Those are real considerations. Insurance is not:

As far as insurance, as you build time the rates should come down in terms of conventional experience v tricycle. After that, its more an issue of how much coverage you want. An fully covered RV-8 conventional gear type, insured for $75,000 will cost you about $1845 to $2000, or there abouts depending on experience. The NG might be less at your experience level. But unless its going to be a hanger queen, your experience level will constantly change.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.