B

bryanrene

Active Member
I am currently flying a great RV-4, 180hp and cs prop. I love the "balance" in the controls. I also love horsepower and the ability to climb, cruise, etc or come back to equal speeds and almost equal fuel burns. What are your thoughts on the flying comparison between the two? Is the F-1 too heavy in the pitch compared to roll? How about interior space, is it really that much better? Outside of cost, which would you choose? Smokey's opinion was the rocket of course.
 
I've never flown a RV-4 but there is a guy in our group who was one of the early RV-4 builders, Jim Winings. In fact, when Van travels out this way, he stays with Jim. Many of the early improvements to the RV-4 came from Jim and Van and Stan incorporated them into the plans.

Jim flew his RV-4 for years and like you, was totally in love with the harmony of the controls. His airplane was so balanced that he could fly a loop with just two fingers on the stick.

When he built his F1, he was originally very unhappy with the handling. His major complaint was that the elevators were too heavy, so he did two things. One, he replaced the riveted trailing edge elevators with a set that have a rounded edge. Second, he changed the linkage of the elevator bellcrank. This last mod is now standard on all the F1's.

Jim now claims that his Rocket is every bit as responsive as his RV-4 was, only with more go power. With regards to space, there's no comparison. I don't have the exact measurements, but there is much more space in the F1 than the RV-4.

Regarding fuel economy, you can fly a Rocket at the same speeds as a RV-4 180-HP CS prop and burn close to the same fuel......or you can fly 20 kts faster, your choice. I know, I know, it doesn't sound plausible. Well, every single time a gaggle of us fly somewhere, we always fly at the speed of the slowest airplane in the group, usually a 160 HP RV-6A. When we land for fuel, we always compare burns and we are always within a gallon one way or the other with the other 4-bangers in the group.

As far as choice? There is no choice if $$ is not an issue. You can do everything a RV can do and more in a Rocket. Of course, that also includes burning 24 GPH WOT if you choose to do so!
 
I've built and/or owned 4 RV4's, 1 RV6, 2 RV7's, 1 RV8, and an RV10......my F1 will be flying shortly so I'll let you know how it 'compares' to the RV4. As Randy mentioned in his post...Jim Winings is an excellent source of knowledge in this comparison...as Smokey Ray would be. I've encorporated some of Jim's mods into my F1 project. I suppose 'looks' are in the eyes of the beholder.....but I sure like the 'look' of my F1 in the garage...I hope it flies as good as it looks :D.

As a sidebar....let me mention that Mark Fredrick of Team Rocket has been an absolute pleasure to do business with :).
 
I've flown Jim's rocket from the front a few times...shortened elevator bellcrank and I built him a set of elevators without the riveted trailing edges. I hope mine handles as nice as his, a loop in his airplane can be done with two fingers on the stick. May not be to the liking for a lot of people but I sure do like it. Better than any RV I've flown.
 
f1rocket said:
Regarding fuel economy, you can fly a Rocket at the same speeds as a RV-4 180-HP CS prop and burn close to the same fuel......or you can fly 20 kts faster, your choice. I know, I know, it doesn't sound plausible.
Click to expand...

Actually, it does. The HR is fastback and clean cowled. It's just smoother. So you should burn comparable (or less) fuel than an RV-4 @ the same net HP. HP = fuel, hard to put it any other way.
 
BruceMe said:
Actually, it does. The HR is fastback and clean cowled. It's just smoother. So you should burn comparable (or less) fuel than an RV-4 @ the same net HP. HP = fuel, hard to put it any other way.
Click to expand...

You might have to "splain" that to a few posters on this forum, I get beat up every time I mention it. I guess I'm a little gun shy at this point.
 
I loved my RV4. When I first flew it in 1995 I thought it would be the last plane I would ever own as I could not imagine an airplane that could do more. After a year and a half of flight I found myself dreaming; more power would be nice, more passenger and luggage capability would be practical, definitely more room for the pilot, it would be great to give the passenger more leg room, more panel space would also be an improvement. These were all just idle thoughts until I read a magazine article about the Harmon Rocket II. All of my dreams seem to have been answered. At the same time the RV8 came out. I was going to build one of them, due mainly to the Van’s record, but there were none flying. At the time there were eleven HRIIs in the air. A friend of mine had seen one at Oshkosh and he told me that was the plane to build. He said that it was absolutely beautiful and the sound in the circuit was unbelievable. So I bought a kit and seventeen months later I was in the air. It lived up to all my dreams. My rocket was the first one that I had seen, and there was no internet at the time, so the build was a bit challenging but well worth the effort.
Since then I have built another HRII and five F1s. I currently have well over 1000 flight hours in rockets and I sometimes I dream about another plane but so far I have not found one that compares. They have really spoiled me for flight in other aircraft. Passing other aircraft is fun, getting passed is not.
 
Last edited:
f1rocket said:
You might have to "splain" that to a few posters on this forum, I get beat up every time I mention it. I guess I'm a little gun shy at this point.
Click to expand...

Specific Fuel Consumption - It takes fuel to make power... Now the HR has a lot more power in reserve. If I had that much reserve... I'd be prone to use it ;) That said... if you put a smaller engine in an HR, you'd be carrying less weight and less fuel, that would go that much further.


I like Smokey wonderful Right Stuff quote, "No bucks... no Buck Rogers"

-Bruce

"There was a demon that lived in the air."
 
Nothing is free in this flying business!

There is no doubt I LOVED my Rocket! Smokey, you remember when I bought my yellow Rocket at OSH 2002 with your encouragement (and jealousy I remember ;-). And yes the 2,500 fpm and 200K+ speed was wonderful and on my first long cross country back from OSH flying in formation with my father in laws RV-6 IO-360 powered speedster at altitide, we were generally within 2 gallons of fuel each fillup....however:

In my Rocket, if you ever got caught low altitude because of WX, the gph went up significantly. Secondly, the total cost of a Rocket is just going to be more. My current RV-4 Fastback, soon ready to fly (hopefully) with O-360 and CS prop total cost is about what I had $$$ in my Demar IO-540 Lyc (300hp) and Hartzel. Everytime I flew that beast, and again, I LOVED IT!!! I always hoped nothing broke because parts are just more expensive. And of course insurance was significantly higher. So, true, I'm now relegated to 'only' 2,000 fpm and 175K in my Monty Barret IO-360 CS Hoffman RV-6 but flying 'seems' cheaper at half the purchase price and my soon to be -4 should be cheaper still, and, really, i still think nothing flys as pure as a -4, having owned 4 -4s, a -6 and an -8. I do hear, however, a good -3 trumps all???

Just my dos centavos
 
Well, the original poster did say "outside of cost......".

No doubt my Rocket costs me more than my RV-6. It's not for everyone.
 
Not to pick on Chevrolet, but they make a really nice handling Cobalt GT and a really fast and nice handling ZR1 Corvette. Blondes and Brunettes, etc. Choices, choices.....thank goodness we have them. ;)
 
Worth every penny...

Gentlemen,
Reading the preceding posts makes me thankful for Doug Reeves to have this site, wow! To compare my RV4 with my Harmon Rocket (my only Rocket experience) is pretty straightforward. The Rocket costs twice what the RV4 does, but isn't twice the airplane. But almost...
I consider myself an experienced RV4 builder/pilot and look at the Rocket as a modification of that fantastic design. I bought my Rocket two years ago. It was built and test flown back in 96' within one week of my RV4's test flight starting it's life as an RV4 kit within 20 serial numbers of mine. In two years I have gone through it, repaired and modified/improved many items and flown 250 awesome hours. For more details on the parts kit, reference www.harmonrocket.com
I had dinner with John Harmon in January and his eyes still light up when he talks about his RV4 and 3's. The HR2 though really gets him excited. He told me when he had the RV4 and HR2, the RV4 gathered dust. The Harmon Rocket is simply an improved RV4 across the board, an amazing machine. I firmly believe I could beat the F16 to 1000' feet from a standing stop. I would be airborne and climbing 3000 fpm while the Viper was still rolling. On the exact same cross country routes I frequented in The Bandit, I burn the exact same fuel and get there sooner. It rolls slightly quicker, is much more stable in pitch (even than the -8)Has alot more room inside and takeoff and climb are simply amazing. I have taken it into all of my favorite short grass strips (vice one) yet it keeps up with King Airs down low. Lately I find myself throttling back to RV4 fuel burns and speeds but have the power on tap to see 200 knots if I want to burn more dinosaurs.
Overall, I give my Rocket the big thumbs up, I love it. Would I put a smaller engine in one aka "Rocket Lite". No. The IO-540 is a big, smooth 6 cyl that gives the HR2 it's efficiency. Do I still love the RV4?

Absolutely...


Rob Ray
HR2
 
Last edited:
Hi there

Having built a 4, I am pretty much preoccupied like people who talk about their own airplanes.
There is something about lightweight RVs that needs to be said, though. I do love my 960lbs RV-4 and I have not flown anything that handles as nice, yet. Well, other light RV-4s of course.
Heavier RV-4s and 6s (never tried a seven but expect it to be similar) are getting close and the 200hp RV-8 that I was given a ride in was great fun no doubt. But flying solo with only 10gal of feul in my RV-4 doing aerobatics tops it all. Actually it is hard to describe why because control forces, numbers and rates do not do it justice. There is something subjective about lightweight airplanes that can not be achieved with horsepower or even horsepower to weight ratio. Perhaps low wing-loading is the key, I do not know.....Personally, I think 20% less weight is worth more than a 10% speed increase, like Rocket vs RV-4.
Having never flown one, I assume the rocket flies like a heavy RV-4 with more power (you tell me if I am wrong) and I sure want more speed, more climb (who does not?) and so on..but I certainly do not want 200 pounds of extra weight even
with an engine that more than compensates this disadvantage talking climb-performance. The rocket guys usually tell you that having all this power available is a nice feeling, cruising at lower power settings and feul burns most of the time.
As an RV-4 guy I think not carrying that 200 pounds around at practical powers settings is a nice feeling as well.
You can throttle back your rocket to RV-speeds and RV-feul burns but how about the handling of an aircraft that is 200 pounds lighter?

just my two cents

Thomas, RV-4
 
Loud and Clear...

Thomas,
What you said about the lightweight RV4 has merit. However comma, having 1500 hours in a 950 lb RV4 and now having 250 hours flying my 1200+lb Rocket with 300 horses I can tell you in no uncertain terms, the Rocket is a better RV4. John Harmon related to me the best part about the Rocket: When you remove almost 2 feet from the wingspan and keep the same number of ribs the wing strength and loading increases. The standard RV4 has almost the exact same wing loading as a Cessna 152. The Rocket has the same as a Beech Baron. The ride is better in bumps and the longer fuselage is more stable laterally. I'm not an AE, but having flown both, the Rocket definitely handles better. The one downside for me would be the Rockets heavier front end vs lighter nose of my 150HP wood prop RV4 in over the top maneuvering. It's other attributes more than make up for the that one issue.
I have found my Rocket burns the same to slightly less fuel on equal routes and carries more stuff aft of the roll bar without CG issues. Also, it has more room in the cockpit, my 2nd favorite part, takeoffs are first! The list goes on...

I'll take you for a ride sometime and you too will be forever ruined...:)

Smokey

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aSU6IU4qjkY&feature=related
 
Last edited:
smokyray said:
The correct number is 1290...lead rivets and all...

Smokey
Click to expand...

GEEZ Smokey. Thank God. I was up half the night trying to figure out how to drop 200lbs from my plane, or how any 6cyl ~rv could weigh 1100lbs, or how I was going to raise the money to come buy yours from you, or how I was going to sneak into your hanger and weigh yours.

I was dreaming of a 300hp rocket under 1100lbs. Thanks for ruining a good nights sleep!

I may now resume normal programming.
 
As I was often told in racing, "Speed costs money, how fast do you want to go?" Attributed to Graham Hill.
 
RV4 versus F1 handling

Wow it's great to hear all the voice of experience speaking about the F1 and the RV4 - etc... and the harmon rocket 2. handling etc... and comparisions. I love my RV4 - moment I saw one i wanted one - and it's an awesome handling plane - I do loops - rolls - cuban's etc... sportsman sequence aerobatics and love it. cost me about 60 - 70 per hour to fly it - whatever that is in gals' probably about 10G per hour. I've always wanted to either try and convert my RV4 - to a quicker version - do the fast back etc... go for that harmon look - but why bother spending the $$ doing all that. Just build a F1 rocket. I'm glad to hear modificaitons to the elevator - linkage and controls so that it's can yank and pull like my RV4. My son and I want to build a QB - F1 - if the HR 2 came in a QB i would have a tough decision though. My decision is the EVO versus the sport wing - MY feelings are totally for the sport wing - particularily since it's 5 G cheaper - but I think it suits my style of flying better. Hope to get started on it later on this summer he's going to A and P or here they call it AME school - he'll be able to log some of the hours we put into it.

Just wanted to say thanks for sharing all that - all of you particuairly smoky and tom - got some great stuff from your conversatons. In our club only one other RV4 - 0 rockets . unfortunatly. My mouth usually drops when I do get to see one! Anyways the data they have on the EVO wing versus the Sport wing is a bit mis leading - 230 cruise at 60% on the sport wing - and 240mph cruise but at 75% power on the EVO wing. My son's like well that's faster we should build that one. if you ran the sport wing version at 75% likely you also would be at 240mph. who cares it's about the handling for me. Amazing planes either way! for my application the sport wing is perfect. I hear they are coming out wiht a 180HP version? any one know anything abou this. to compete against the rV8? QB kit..

Think about it - say a 200HP - lycoming with crome cylinder's etc... all in a 1000lb or less EW - would or could perform almost as well as a 1300lb ew with 50 - 60 mor hP. Use less fuel - and still have a ball. probably those kits would be 38? maybe 40G you can get a nice IO360 rebuilt for about 15 - 20 G. versus - 25 - 40 for a IO540. And also save on the prop. don't need a MT 3 blade 15G prop. I think you could do a build like that for about 60 - to 70G. where as the standard F1 is going to cost minimum 100G. I would think with avoinics etc... And I'm talking with a Rebuilt - IO 540 - not brand new! I would like to complete my build for 80 or less. so that's why i'm interested in this new 180HP F1 if there is one coming! let me know! have a great day guys.
 
I like you're thinking..

Frowe,
As you know I am a big fan of the HR2 and the RV4. Having owned and flown both extensively I can compare the two from ownership and fun vs $$$ and utility. Having seen all of the pros and cons, your thoughts are right on target. My buddy JJ echoed my sentiments and got out his bucking bar.

I give you his Fastback 4...



Maybe Mark can build a kit :)
V/R
Smokey
www.fly-4-life.com
 
Last edited:
For all of this chest beating about Rockets, Wasn?t it an RV-4 that beat the pants off a Rocket for the Triaviaton record? :eek:
Maybe Horsepower isn?t the end all to performance.:D
 
This has been a very helpful thread - I'm trying to think through this very topic of RV-4 vs RV-8 vs Rocket considering the fact that the purchase price does vary significantly across all three airframes (I'm looking to buy versus build).

Other than the cockpit size difference, does it really come down to 'bang for the buck' if cost IS a factor? Can you get 90% of the Rocket experience in a 180hp RV-4 at a third of the cost? I know I'm simplifying a bit, but just trying to figure out how to rack and stack this.

TO
 
Last edited:
For all of this chest beating about Rockets, Wasn’t it an RV-4 that beat the pants off a Rocket for the Triaviaton record?
Maybe Horsepower isn’t the end all to performance.

One must keep in mind that Dave Anders RV4 can hardly be considered an average RV4. It is an awesome example of what someone can accomplish with a lot of effort and experimentation. He has shared his information with our flying community and I for one have benefited from his work.

Here are the results from the 2010 AirVenture cup race
My speed, EVO rocket 262.21mph
Dave Anders RV4 240.58

Tom Martin
 
Last edited:
Tom Martin said:
For all of this chest beating about Rockets, Wasn?t it an RV-4 that beat the pants off a Rocket for the Triaviaton record?
Maybe Horsepower isn?t the end all to performance.

One must keep in mind that Dave Anders RV4 can hardly be considered an average RV4. It is an awesome example of what someone can accomplish with a lot of effort and experimentation. He has shared his information with our flying community and I for one have benefited from his work.

Here are the results from the 2010 AirVenture cup race
My speed, EVO rocket 262.21mph
Dave Anders RV4 240.58

Tom Martin
Click to expand...

Dave's CAFE record has never been challenged...............
 
RV-4 vs Rocket Cost

OK, I'm flying my RV-4 and loving every minute of it (except for that cooling thing), and my gaze is starting to drift toward my next project.
I'm thinking about another -4 to fix all the things I didn't know needed fixing until I flew mine. I'm also intrigued with the HR. If I scrimp and scrounge, is it possible to build one for $50,000?
I'm thinking I would like the challenge, and I am not a quick build type of guy.
Anyone have a set of HR plans for sale?
 
I would say it could be done if you built it basic, light, used eng, prop ect. Most of us tend to overspend and go a little overboard. If your a true scrounger it could defiantly be done.
Ryan
Rocket II almost done (more than 50K ;)
 
Short answer, yes.

rvbldr3170 said:
OK, I'm flying my RV-4 and loving every minute of it (except for that cooling thing), and my gaze is starting to drift toward my next project.
I'm thinking about another -4 to fix all the things I didn't know needed fixing until I flew mine. I'm also intrigued with the HR. If I scrimp and scrounge, is it possible to build one for $50,000?
I'm thinking I would like the challenge, and I am not a quick build type of guy.
Anyone have a set of HR plans for sale?
Click to expand...

Absolutely.
How? Sweat equity building airframe. Used engine/prop purchase or newly rebuilt airboat IO-540, Very basic panel (MGL Extreme, used Dynon), second hand radio/xponder single color paint, vinyl trim.
I loved my Rocket (not as much as the F-16:)) and my RV4. Flew both for 1000 hours. However comma, HR2 yearly ownership expenses were nearly twice my RV4.

FYI...
Smokey
 
You must log in or register to reply here.