C

ConneryIsTheBestBond

Member
Hello folks,

I'm still in the dreaming process before all of the "fun" starts. I'm curious how you decided which RV to build?

I've wanted to build an -8 since they came out. I was, however, a teenager at the time. So, I'm finally getting to the point I can seriously entertain the notion of building in the next few years. Still glued on the -8...BUT,

It seems that there are a lot of redeeming qualities in the other aircraft too. I could see myself in a -7, -8, -9 , -10 (but the -10 is out of my price range). For me, the -8 seems like the best fit. I like the tandem seating, the performance, the ability to do acro and the overall good looks. For me, I guess its like having a sports car. I figure if I'm going to build something for a decade and fly it for several more, I better love everything about it. But, there are voices in my head saying look and research the other models too.

So, lets hear how you and your "baby" fell in love and made you take the plunge on a certain model.

I guess I have plenty of time to become a repeat offender if things don't work out :D
 
In my case, it was easy.....

The RV-6 was the only SBS RV offered. A lot more choices now.
If I were building now, I would probably go with the -9. I like the low end performance and the older I get, the less aerobatics I do.
Of course I like all RVs!
 
I'm 6'6" and though I wanted to build an RV the ones I'd tried to sit in were pretty cramped. My wife was looking for a romantic getaway for our 25th wedding anniversary and when I suggested Casselton, North Dakota she laughed and said yes. ;) We met with 2 RV 8 builders in the area. Both very helpful and forthcoming with information, but after we met with Lance in Portland, ND who had put in the tall option and relocated his seat back she gave her blessing to begin. If we fit, I'm sure she would have preferred a 7 which would be nice for trips, but I'm looking forward to the tandem seating for the majority of fun flying.
 
Process of elimination.
I wanted acro, so the -9 & -10 were out.
Wife wanted SBS, so the -4, -8 were out.
First time builder, so I wanted pre-punch kit.
My wife would like to learn to fly so I right now I plan on a nose wheel...
Thus RV-7A.

(Next build will be -3, just for me!)
 
7a

Wife insisted on SBS plus the extra panel space made IFR easier to achieve.

Never flown a tailwheel but truth be told I'd probably build a straight 7 if I were starting now.

But then I'd probably go with an IO540 engine too.

Frank
 
7A

First was 42 gallons of factory fuel, then Fast, Aerobatic and a VERY Strong Airframe... even if I don't use all or any of the previous listed items, it is the best SBS choice.
 
Much Like You

I was much like you, except I was 7 when the RV8 origionally came out. I've been drooling over RVs since I knew about them in my late teens when I learned how to fly.

I decided to build a RV8 because I wanted an airplane that I could go rip around VFR on a good day. It had to be fast and capable of mild aerobatics. It was a toss-up between a 7 and 8 for a while, but the tandem seating won because I really liked the RH stick/LH throttle combination.

If I were going to build an IFR RV, it would be a 9 or a 10 for sure. Reasoning being the wider panels, side-by-side seating and a more stable airframes. I'm not saying a 6 or 7 isn't a good IFR platform. I've flown an aerobatic aircraft in IMC, and it's pretty un-nerving when you look down to set a CDI and find yourself in a 30 degree bank. Never had that problem in a Seminole though. In IMC, airframe stability is your friend.
 
I actually started a -7 with out flying in any RV.. I felt the SBS being what I was most familar with woule be ideal. Then I had the chance to fly an -8 as well as the -7. I felt in love with the -8 right away. Luckly I was only working on the emp. kit. I found someone who was building a 7 who wanted an 8 and we switched out the different parts.

If you can try getting rides in the different models, that should help make your mind up.
 
David Z said:
I decided to build a RV8 because I wanted an airplane that I could go rip around VFR on a good day. It had to be fast and capable of mild aerobatics. It was a toss-up between a 7 and 8 for a while, but the tandem seating won because I really liked the RH stick/LH throttle combination.

.
Click to expand...

My 7a is set up as a RH stick LH throttle

When I fly acro I fly it this way..when I fly IFR I fly LH on stick and do this swap hands dance deal..its so natural now i don't notice I'm doing it..:)

Frank
 
I've built both a -6 and a 8A. There was no 8 or 9 when the -6 was built.
I choose the -6 because it was side by side and the taildragger looked
so good and I wanted the challange of the conventional gear. My dreams
turned into reality. We mostly found ourselves hunting hamburgers or
travelling. For the next step, the RV-10 would have been best but was
beyond the budget. The extra room of the -8A (the RV-6 was tight in the
shoulders) and it's better CG possibilities with front and rear baggage
compartments were the deciding factors for us (my wife LIKES the back
seat of the -8A). And although the nosewheel brought grief from my
friends, it was a good practical choice for me.

Any choice will be a good one.
 
RV-6A, O-360-A1A

I thought that was the best airplane for us when I made my choice (there were no 7,8,9,10 airplanes at the time). I am very much a romantic sort of guy I guess but I like to have my wife by my side. When I went to North Plains, Oregon to get some builder training that was offered at that time by Van's the RV-8 fuselage was being developed and it sat there beside us in the classroom. The shape of it is perfect in my eyes and if I were a single guy that is what I would build. They are much faster than every other Van's design (yes I know about that one exceptionally fast RV-4) as is proven time and time again in every SARL race (Alan Carroll has taken the results of several years of SARL cross Country race results and verified this). I am doing everything I can to make my RV-6A faster and if I don't screw up I usually beat everything but fast RV-8s and 200 hp RV-7s.

All RVs of the same number designation are not alike. In my opinion all of the RVs have too little fuel capacity for serious cross country flying and when not racing I install tip tanks bringing the capacity up to 55 gallons. That gives me good 4 hour max power operation at 2450 rpm at any altitude with IFR + reserves. For racing I, replace the stock 12" tips and 9" tip tanks with 3" streamlined tips of my own manufacture, remove the steps, install subfairings on the wheel fairings, and tape all of the landing gear seams. The other speed mods stay on full time. The O-360 is the largest engine specified by Van's for the RV-6 but I intend to boost the performance of mine in the next year or so. I think the wing tips on the later model RVs look like a bird flaring for landing - I don't like them at all but that's just me. What ever I built would have a different wingtip design installed. RV-6s are no longer available so in my current situation I would build an RV-7A. It is fast and RV-9As are slow, I couldn't care less about aerobatic capability or low speed capability. RV-10s are fast (surprisingly so based on race performance) but it just doesn't fit my desires. If my situation were different the RV-8 is the only RV I would consider.

Bob Axsom
 
Last edited:
1> My wife doesn't want to sit behind me.
2> I want the option of aerobatics.
3> I'm very limited on funds.
4> I found a 6a kit (2 emps, wings, fuselage) on Barnstormers for $6500

And that's that.
 
Prior to the RV-9, I had a 1941 T-Craft BC-12/65. As in model B 12, Continental powered, 65 HP 95 mph screamer.

I loved that little plane and landed it on every grass strip I flew over. However, 95 mph and a 38" cabin width were a bit limiting.

I started on an RV-6 tail kit around 1998 or so and it languished. Then Van's announced the RV-9, nose wheel only, with the O-235. I promised myself that if they ever came out with a tailwheel version of that plane I would build one. It didn't take long for Van's to move the little wheel to the back and I ordered one.

At the time, the -7 had not been announced but even then, I doubt I would have built one.

As much as I love my -9, if I were to build a second plane, I'm not sure what it would be. The -10 would be nice because a two place with a three place family doesn't work out very well. If I gave the -9 to my wife and built a -3, then I could stuff both planes in the hangar and if we took a trip, we could take both planes. So, which is cheaper, one RV-10 or one RV-9 and one RV-3?

If I were to build another two place RV, it would be the RV-8 because I think they look great!

As for those grass strips is used to visit in my T-craft, now I do it in my RV-9.
 
eric_marsh said:
1> My wife doesn't want to sit behind me.
2> I want the option of aerobatics.
3> I'm very limited on funds.
4> I found a 6a kit (2 emps, wings, fuselage) on Barnstormers for $6500

And that's that.
Click to expand...

Eric, I sent you a PM................
 
As everyone always says, "it depends on your mission." This is so true.

My mission is for day/night, vfr/ifr, cross country, and light aerobatic with sustained inverted flight (yes, I actually enjoy it). Also, I like to fly fast when I want to. I wanted conventional gear, and I wanted an RV. My better half insisted on side-by-side seating. I also wanted the newer pre-punched kit. All of these things considered ruled out the RV-3, RV-4, RV-8, RV-9, RV-10 and RV-12 (wasn't available yet). The only thing left was the RV-7.

I am very pleased with my choice. I especially like the RV-7 over the RV-8 because of the panel space for additional avionics and the fact that, whether you fly from the left or right seat, you have access and visibility of ALL panel instruments/avionics.

If I didn't want to fly aerobatics, I would definitely go for the RV-9. It is a very nice aircraft with great characteristics.

I still think the RV-8 is just sexier, and would fit my mission best if I were flying single most of the time (yes, I know, most will say that I will fly solo most of the time anyway, but tell that to my wife;)).

You really can't lose no matter what you choose.
 
Last edited:
Yes... For sure, if you're flying the straight and level (no Aerobatics) the RV9 would be the only way to go. SBS is the way to go. :)
 
I was smitten with the -10, but the realities of how much it would cost to build brought me back to earth. Soooo....

Most of my flying has been with one other person, anyway, so no need for 4 seats on about 90% of my flights
I enjoy going up with other pilots and taking turns doing IFR work and challenging each other practicing - that means side-by-side
I don't really have much need to fly in to unimproved strips, so didn't "need" a taildragger
Wanted the capability to learn and then do "gentleman's" aerobatics
And lastly...we intend to travel in this, not just hop around locally, and the capability to deal with less-than-optimal weather at times - day/night VFR/IFR.

Ergo: 7A with an IO-360 and a CS prop.

Now all this has me feeling bad that a cold this week has kept me from working on her...out to the garage I must go, first thing in the a.m.! :)
 
It's not only about you...

....as several of my tandem owning RV buddies found out. They sold their tandems.

Their wives refused to sit "in that hole back there" as my wife puts it:)

Let your significant other sit/ride in a tandem and a SBS and save yourself a lot of grief.

Best,
 
-6 was the only sbs model when I ordered, so that made it an easy choice at the time for the first one. After that was finished, I promised myself an -8 at sometime in the future, so that will be next.
 
I have done all the aerobatics I ever want to do--loved it, but that was a while ago. I was looking for good low speed handling and effeciency, and the 9 really seemed to have it over the 7, all without much loss of top end. The -A part was because I was not that great a taildragger pilot, insurance was lower, and my partner was low-time. Now having flown RV taildraggers, I might reconsider and build a TD if I had to do it again. They are about the easiest TDs I have flown. I didn't consider the tandems because of my wife (that seems to be common!)

This second build isn't for me as it will be sold. The 12 was selected for the High School Eagle's Nest project because it is an easy build. It offers a great building experience, and does it quickly. It offers all the advantages of being a Van's product, plus the ease of construction that will allow it to be finished while most of the original builders are still in school. While there are arguments pro and con between 7, 8, & 9, the 12 holds a unique position in aviation today, IMHO.

Bob
 
Last edited:
ConneryIsTheBestBond said:
Hello folks,
So, lets hear how you and your "baby" fell in love and made you take the plunge on a certain model.
Click to expand...

What airplane would make me most want to drive all the way to the airport and use the plane often as opposed to this becoming just another passing fad and possibly wasted money and years of my life and time away from the family. When I could visualize the D-Day invasion scheme on an RV8 to my liking the similarity to a P-51 became obvious and the rest is family history once my wife could see the end game too. Here's our end game, we call it our family plane, not my plane.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3118/2768232766_c72792f172_b.jpg
 
Go for the 8.

Real pilots sit on the center line of an airplane.

If you do any other, you'll wish you had an 8.

Aside from that, you can't go wrong. RV's, all of them, are great flying machines. :)
 
lucky said:
.....When I could visualize...
Click to expand...
Not the least bit interested in painting an airplane myself, I plan to fly my -8 away to some paint shop, drop it off, tell the owner to "see to it," and call me when it's done. All that plan lacks on my part is a firm decision on what it is exactly that I want done.:confused:

I gotta tell you Lucky, I've reviewed literally hundreds of RV paint schemes yet found myself more than once lingering over the images of your -8. You've got a real looker there. My compliments. You should be very proud.:cool:
 
David-aviator said:
Go for the 8.
Real pilots sit on the center line of an airplane.
If you do any other, you'll wish you had an 8.
Aside from that, you can't go wrong. RV's, all of them, are great flying machines. :)
Click to expand...

Not true! I don't sit on the center line, and I don't wish I had an -8.
 
kinda like Paul, the 8 chose me I think:)

I know one thing, you pick one, you build it the way you want it, it will fit you, and you will love it regardless if it is a 4 6 7 8 or 9 and yes, on some models, even where you put that 3rd wheel.

or as CSNY said -- love the one you're with!
 
My first RV ride was in a -4. At 6'1", it was kinda cramped back there. A friend was building a -6A, and it looked an awful lot like the Yankee that I owned, just sleeker and faster. I realized that 90% of my flying was solo, and it just didn't make much sense to have that dead space next to me and have my weight be off-center. But I didn't want to build a -4 and be cramped all the time. What to do?

Well, just about that time Van's introduced the RV-8. Over the 13-year project, I only second-guessed myself about the tailwheel decision. Turns out that I made the right choices. My wife has joined me in about 5 of the 130 hours that I now have on Smokey, and a handful of other passengers account for about another 4 hours. The rest is solo. I like my own personal fighter.

My only regret is when I take a cross-country trip. It would be nice to have that seat next to me to lay out sectionals and notes. However, I've learned to adapt.

And, as an aside, my winter project (well, since it took me 13 winters to build the plane, who knows how many winters this will take!) is an ACES II ejection seat. When that's installed, there will be no room for a passenger anyway. I'll probably have the world's only single-seat RV-8. :D

Build the plane for the missions that you intend to fly and that makes you smile every time you open your hangar door ...
 
When I chose mine I knew I wanted a SBS and a nosewheel. I considered the 9A for a long time but finally decided on a 7A for the extra fuel and stronger acro frame (even though I have yet to do any acro).

I'm very happy with my decision. My wife only flew with me once or twice in rented spam cans but now she quite enjoys flying in our RV.

Once in a while I wish I had the extra capacity of the -10 or the cool factor of a -8 or -4 but overall I love my 7A.
 
N8RV said:
Well, just about that time Van's introduced the RV-8. Over the 13-year project, I only second-guessed myself about the tailwheel decision. Turns out that I made the right choices. My wife has joined me in about 5 of the 130 hours that I now have on Smokey, and a handful of other passengers account for about another 4 hours. The rest is solo. I like my own personal fighter.
Click to expand...

My wife likes the sight and sound of P-51 fighters as much as I do......... a lot! In our case, she's got 108 hrs of right seat time, out of the 147 on the plane. And I'm glad, since I like the company. And since we like the WWII fighter look, we painted it like a P-51,.. even if I have to stand in front of the nose wheel for photo ops... :D

L.Adamson --- RV6A
 
Figure out your mission and build what ever you want...there is no wrong RV.

I first rode in a -6, liked it. Then backseated a -4, loved it. I was helping build a fabric plane, when on a trip we saw a RV-10. My wife said build one of these! OK, but the mission and budget dictated RV-7.

Like I said no wrong choice. Today while doing an engine break-in run I looked over at MT Baldy while I was doing 200mph in a airplane I built in my garage! Holy ****....someone pinch me.
RV-7build1149.jpg


I think I was 24 squared, 6500' for this GPS pic
RV-7build1153.jpg
 
You don't need sectionals...

N8RV said:
......My only regret is when I take a cross-country trip. It would be nice to have that seat next to me to lay out sectionals and notes. However, I've learned to adapt.

...
Click to expand...

In my single seat Air Tractor, I don't have much room for sectionals but my new iPad does the trick and is a legal replacement for charts.....$19.95 one-time fee for SkychartsPro and free renewals.:)

Best,
 
Like Paul said

Paul said it best, the -8 chose him.

When I started researching which RV to build, I flew the -6 and the -4. My wife won't fly much and if she does she doesn't mind the motorcycle type of experience a tandem gives.
So I settled on the -4 pretty quickly. I like the looks and the tight fighter feel, but my buds said I had to build an -8 (prepunch - more room, fuel and resale value). I just don't like the shape of the windshield/canopy as compared to the -4 - sorry I'm really driven by aesthetics. In the end I solved the problem by modifying the w/s on the -8 (flat wrap sloped) and I'm sure I have the perfect airplane for me. Although I have yet to fly in an -8, which I hope to fix in 2011. One caveat, there is one airplane I would like more, but money got in the way - an F1 Rocket.
My 2 cents.
 
Last edited:
Simple

I told my wife I was going to build a RV-8. She said "OK".

My wife tells me what she is serving for dinner. I say "OK".

We seem to understand each other.
 
For me it was rather simple..

My wife didn't want to sit behind me and look at my reclining hairline for prolonged periods of time... So side by side it was...
Started building a 7A but sold the project as 100LL prices shot out of the roof on our side of the ocean... Looked for O-320 power to burn mogas and mix economy with relative good speed. Wanted a taildragger to get rid of the everlasting nosewheel issue... Found the perfect 9 and only needed to convert the seat to fit 6ft3' in body length.. Could not be happier with this plane !
 
Circumstances

Pretty logical illogical process for me:
1. A GA buddy listed a bunch of logical and emotional reasons why one should avoid plastic airplanes.
2. As a 6 ft, 220 lb formal Naval Avaiator with over 4000 hours in the A-4 Skyhawk's small cockpit, I figured I wouldn't know how to fly unless my shoulder bades were touching the canopy rails.
3. 7000 hrs. total time - but zero tail dragger time.
4. Live in Ridgecrest, CA, a small remote desert town with no nearby tail dragger instruction options. (I also have a time-intensive real job in aerospace).
5. 67 years old - good health, but at my age, good health is a crapshoot - wanted to get it built in a reasonable time.

If I didn't have to contend with (3), (4) and (5) I'd have built an RV-8; as it turned out I decided to build an RV-8A QB. Even so, my projected 3-year project has turned out to be a 6+ year labor of love.
 
I Surprised Myself

I spent years planning to build a tandem RV. Tandems were the answer, no matter the question, because they are "sporty" and sexy and just like high performance military airplanes.

Things change. Last summer my wife and I had the spectacular good fortune to take a P-40 fighter away to an airshow for the weekend. It was a two-seater, so she got to ride in the back seat. She loves to fly, and we plan to spend some time together in the RV, but the experience of the P-40 changed our minds. Our interactions were limited to talking on the intercom and me occasionally squeezing her ankles when radio chatter interfered with conversation. I couldn't see whether she was happy (was!) or comfortable (was!), so the experience was a lot like going solo. If you want to share the experience of flying with someone, you can't beat getting to see the expression on their face.

I'm now building an RV-6.

Rob Erdos
 
You must log in or register to reply here.