P

pmel

Member
Hi guys I want to build a plane and am considering the 12 or the sonex with the 3300 jab. Any comments?? Thanks
 
Sonex is nice but not for two people...the passenger kinda hasta put his/her arm around the pilot.
 
pmel said:
Hi guys I want to build a plane and am considering the 12 or the sonex with the 3300 jab. Any comments?? Thanks
Click to expand...


The Sonex is very small inside - it's really tight for two normal people. Also, it's aerobatic. According to the Sonex website, it qualifies as an LSA, even with the big Jabiru, but they are talking out of both sides of their mouth when they claim "meets LSA spec's AND has a 170 mph cruise at altitude".

The -12 is big enough inside for two real people, was designed to be fully LSA compliant, and isn't aerobatic. In real use, it won't be as fast, but will have better low speed characteristics than the Sonex.

Which one better fits your mission?
 
Hi ...I have yet seen an rv-12 up close, definitly want to do that. Sat in a sonex while visiting family in VA, yes small but I wonder how many people will want to fly with me anyway. I think these are both good choices.
 
Kyle Boatright said:
According to the Sonex website, it qualifies as an LSA, even with the big Jabiru, but they are talking out of both sides of their mouth when they claim "meets LSA spec's AND has a 170 mph cruise at altitude".
Click to expand...

Kyle,

The FAA has already tried to say the Sonex with the 3300 wasn't LSA compliant. In fact, it was my former Sonex they tried to ground. With the help of the EAA the issue has been resolved. It is LSA compliant.

Vh and "at altitude" have nothing in common.

The Sonex cockpit is tight. Same size as the C-150. When I tilt my head outboard in the Sonex, it hits the canopy. Just like an RV-6. And just like my RV-3.

Tony
 
You may want to look at the Rans S-19 as well. It seems to be very competitive with the RV-12.
 
I have 2 friends with Sonex. Both initially flying with AeroVee engines.
The final cost to build around 23k. They both like the plane especially the low cost entry point.

Front bench seat is small & not comfortable for 2 people.
One is building another plane, the other is installing the jab3300 just coming off phase 1.

I think the 12 would offer better resale potential and a more comfortable flying machine.
 
flickroll said:
You may want to look at the Rans S-19 as well. It seems to be very competitive with the RV-12.
Click to expand...

Nice plane but it has a slider canopy which adds considerable weight. The S-19 weighs in well over 800 lbs, the 12 more like 720/730. Also you must put down a 50 percent non-refundable deposit when you order. No credit cards.
 
S-19 comments

I'm sure the S-19 is a fine plane. I met a guy in SW wisc. that is building one. Was surprised to see he had to mark a line on ribs flanges, and then drill holes, and deburr the holes. He was just as surprised when I told him I didn't have to do any of that building the 12.

John Bender
 
There is a Sonex in the hanger next door to my -12. Nice plane, but there is no comparison to the view / visability from the cockpit.
 
I don't know about the RV12, but there's no plane in the world with a worse view than the Sonex. We had a Sonex/Jab 3300 hangared at my airport for a while and from inside, well, about all you can see is airplane ;).

Spectacular performer tho and seemed to be a pretty well designed plane.

LS
 
Mel said:
Ever flown a bi-plane?
Click to expand...

Hmm. Good point. Did get taken for a brief ride in a Starduster once and yeah you couldn't see much either up or down.

But I swear I couldn't see anything out of the Sonex I sat in. Granted we didn't fly in it, but all I could see was wing and lots panel and nose just sitting in it. I'd reject it on view alone even tho it seems to be a really well built and flying plane otherwise.

The RV12 videos I've seen from inside show a simply zounds better view....

LS
 
Tony Spicer said:
Kyle,

The FAA has already tried to say the Sonex with the 3300 wasn't LSA compliant. In fact, it was my former Sonex they tried to ground. With the help of the EAA the issue has been resolved. It is LSA compliant.

Vh and "at altitude" have nothing in common.

The Sonex cockpit is tight. Same size as the C-150. When I tilt my head outboard in the Sonex, it hits the canopy. Just like an RV-6. And just like my RV-3.

Tony
Click to expand...

Hi Tony...your dvd is awesome !! Its what made me notice and want a sonex..the performance seems amazing for lsa....still want to sit in an rv-12 thanks..
 
Tony Spicer said:
Well, Lucien, quite the comment from someone who has never even flown in one. Strap these on:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=596Mc7BJd1M&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6LMEho9DrU

Tony
Click to expand...

Hi Tony,

Yep I watched your vids a couple million times when I was researching the Sonex. Awsome! I wish I'd gotten to at least go around the patch in the local one before it was sold. It was a fantastic performer....

The view still can't compare to my tornado tho (and this is with the camera just stuffed in a corner ;)):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VF137YWAlUI

LS
LS
 
You can't beat the Sonex with their AeroVee kit engine as a price point. If they made a good looking tandem bird - I'd probably jump on it.

However, in addition to the looks (definitely not a thing of beauty) which I couldn't get past - I have read a couple less than flattering flight reports criticizing control harmony... or maybe it was just the pitch sensitivity. Tony Spicer here loved his... SO I'd say make sure you fly one before committing (unlike a lot of RV builders who surprisingly have never flown an RV!). In looking at a couple projects - the Sonex looks like a much more DIY type project compared to the quality of the Match-hole, rapid build RV-12.

Just a couple points to consider from the cheap seats... ;)

DJ
 
Phyrcooler said:
You can't beat the Sonex with their AeroVee kit engine as a price point. If they made a good looking tandem bird - I'd probably jump on it.

However, in addition to the looks (definitely not a thing of beauty) which I couldn't get past - I have read a couple less than flattering flight reports criticizing control harmony... or maybe it was just the pitch sensitivity. Tony Spicer here loved his... SO I'd say make sure you fly one before committing (unlike a lot of RV builders who surprisingly have never flown an RV!). In looking at a couple projects - the Sonex looks like a much more DIY type project compared to the quality of the Match-hole, rapid build RV-12.

Just a couple points to consider from the cheap seats... ;)

DJ
Click to expand...

The owner of the local Sonex also commented on this, in particular the pitch sensitivity. But then get into my tornado which also has a fully flying stabilator and you'll quickly learn to go easy on the stick fore and aft too.... ;)

In fact, I _only_ rejected the Sonex because of the view. Everything else about the plane I thought was great - flight performance, build quality and Sonex themselves had a really good reputation, the engine options etc.....

I have yet to get into an RV12 but from the videos I've seen from the inside it looks like the best view available in a front-engined low-wing that I've seen..... And then it's going to fly like an RV too.....

LS
 
For visibility, are people comparing view on the ground, or while flying? And if on the ground, are you considering tricycle geared configurations in each case? Even the -6's and -7's have poor over-the-nose visiblity for me on the ground. Okay to one side, but not really great to the other. Just looking at the configuration, it looks like the Sonex and -12 would have similar visibility in the air, maybe a little better in the -12.

I actually considered the Sonex before starting my -7 project, and only rejected it because when I was done I would be running flat-out to keep up with my friends in RV's. The one I sat in at Arlington fit me fine. Sure, it's tighter than an RV, but it's also 1/3 the cost and 90% of the cruise performance.

One thing I noticed is that the canopy didn't line up on any of the three examples i've seen so far. Maybe just bad examples of the type, but i'd want a tighter fit if I was building one.
 
lucien said:
In fact, I _only_ rejected the Sonex because of the view.
Click to expand...

Although, it's an odd mix...we've been debating between the Xenos and the RV-7. My main worry about the Sonex line has been the view, as well. (Haven't flown in one yet, though.)

To tie that back a little to the RV-12 forum, by better half is considering sport pilot or glider...although she is leaning most toward gliders, and then getting a self launch endorsement to make it easier to participate when we fly together.

If she goes and does it...and wants to stick with that route, the Xenos becomes a better "first build" choice, as we could both get some utility out of it. With the 3300, it's not all that much different in spec than the DA20 I fly now, and it has a reasonable glide. I think I'd prefer if for powered flight she went LSA and we built a 12 though...

Of course, then I'd probably want to start building plane number two, as an RV7 or 10. ;)

Lots to think about. I know this is all about defining a mission...but that part is somewhat uncertain for the moment. Just me, I'd order the 7 tomorrow.
 
someone made the point that the rv would be an easier build...and then there is the performance issue...hmmmm lots to think about
 
DCat22 said:
Although, it's an odd mix...we've been debating between the Xenos and the RV-7. My main worry about the Sonex line has been the view, as well. (Haven't flown in one yet, though.)

To tie that back a little to the RV-12 forum, by better half is considering sport pilot or glider...although she is leaning most toward gliders, and then getting a self launch endorsement to make it easier to participate when we fly together.

If she goes and does it...and wants to stick with that route, the Xenos becomes a better "first build" choice, as we could both get some utility out of it. With the 3300, it's not all that much different in spec than the DA20 I fly now, and it has a reasonable glide. I think I'd prefer if for powered flight she went LSA and we built a 12 though...

Of course, then I'd probably want to start building plane number two, as an RV7 or 10. ;)

Lots to think about. I know this is all about defining a mission...but that part is somewhat uncertain for the moment. Just me, I'd order the 7 tomorrow.
Click to expand...

I went through a similar thought process when my medical went bye-bye for good when I was 37. PP glider is a great rating because you can fly powered gliders as a full PP. Also, unlike the SP rule, there's no medical requirement.
For me, since I'm already a PPL holder, it would have just been a matter of getting a sailplane endorsement.

The rub tho with PPL-glider isn't the certificate, it's the plane. If it's powered, it has to be a sailplane. I.e. either an EAB-glider or an LSA glider (if there is such a thing, I can't remember off the top of my head). The two huge consequences of that are a) convincing the FAA that your powered aircraft is a glider and b) resale. If you can get the AW cert for it, you can't give the thing away at resale time because the buyer needs a sailplane/self-launch rating to fly it.

So in the end, I opted to simply continue flying under the SP rule with my PPL in aircraft that meet LSA. The restrictions for SP are sometimes a pain, but the overall package is actually more suitable for my mission.

Just a couple of thoughts from someone who also went round the same issue ;)

LS
 
I thought long and hard about this comparison as well. While I love the -12 for the ease of building, I now have a whole Waiex (the V-tailed Sonex) kit in my garage.

The reasons:

-most of my flying will be by myself, just playing around so the size of cabin isn't a huge deal.

-I've always wanted a taildragger, because they look cool.

-After being a build partner on a four place fiberglass airplane, both would be easy to build! I know the -12 takes building to the next level, but for what its worth I built my entire Waiex tail in less than two weeks. Pop rivets are great! (Actually, I should also mention the only thing I really don't like about Sonex kits and that is the lack of directions. You get excellent plans but you have to figure out what to do on your own. Directions would be nice...)

-The Waiex/Sonex kits are built like tanks...very strong! (I don't know as much about the -12, but its not aerobatic)

-I found a never-started, complete Waiex kit, with the Wicks hardware kit and lots of tools for less than 12 grand. Add the Aerovee kit and I'll have an aerobatic fun-to-fly airplane for $20-25K. The -12 would probably end up 2-3 times that much, which for me was the deal breaker. If you look around you can find a lot of partially built Sonex kits out there.


Either way I'm sure you'll have fun building! You've read the pros and cons...chose one and get started!
 
lucien said:
If you can get the AW cert for it, you can't give the thing away at resale time because the buyer needs a sailplane/self-launch rating to fly it.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'd have to get rated to fly it if it was a "glider", myself... ;)

Didn't realize that it would kill the resale. It's not exactly hard to get those ratings as a PP...and I figured more pilots would like to learn new things. Oh, well....
 
"you can find a lot of partially built Sonex kits out there."

Well, that ought to tell you something! :)

Don't know if you're aware, but I'm building a -12. I'll be selling that -6 you had a ride in someday.
 
Dgamble said:
"you can find a lot of partially built Sonex kits out there."

Well, that ought to tell you something! :)

Don't know if you're aware, but I'm building a -12. I'll be selling that -6 you had a ride in someday.
Click to expand...


Hey Dave! My guess is the partially build Sonex kits out on the market means that a lot of people have started the kits but can't finish them. For what its worth, you can find a bunch more RV-6/7/8/9 kits out there partially built as compared to Sonex kits! :)

I saw that you're building the -12. I hope the build goes well. My advice is to keep the -6 for cross countries and the -12 for the local I74 food runs :) Stay in touch sir!
 
Mike_ExpressCT said:
I thought long and hard about this comparison as well. While I love the -12 for the ease of building, I now have a whole Waiex (the V-tailed Sonex) kit in my garage.

The reasons:

-most of my flying will be by myself, just playing around so the size of cabin isn't a huge deal.

-I've always wanted a taildragger, because they look cool.

-After being a build partner on a four place fiberglass airplane, both would be easy to build! I know the -12 takes building to the next level, but for what its worth I built my entire Waiex tail in less than two weeks. Pop rivets are great! (Actually, I should also mention the only thing I really don't like about Sonex kits and that is the lack of directions. You get excellent plans but you have to figure out what to do on your own. Directions would be nice...)

-The Waiex/Sonex kits are built like tanks...very strong! (I don't know as much about the -12, but its not aerobatic)

-I found a never-started, complete Waiex kit, with the Wicks hardware kit and lots of tools for less than 12 grand. Add the Aerovee kit and I'll have an aerobatic fun-to-fly airplane for $20-25K. The -12 would probably end up 2-3 times that much, which for me was the deal breaker. If you look around you can find a lot of partially built Sonex kits out there.


Either way I'm sure you'll have fun building! You've read the pros and cons...chose one and get started!
Click to expand...

thanks mike I LOVE the waiex, really looks cool...thanks
 
You must log in or register to reply here.