What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Disappointed again

JPC

I'm New Here
Don’t know if this is the right place to post this but here I go.
After 12 months of searching for a straight tidy rv6. I’ve bid on numerous planes that could’ve been but aren’t mine, I’m a little disheartened that I’ll ever get into a 6. Two in Europe fell through because of a gross weight issue and another because I’m on the other side of the planet and got beaten to the punch. The other two were in the US, I’m in Australia, again beaten to the finishing post. So I thought I’d post here and see if I can’t get a heads up on a 6. Meaning if there’s anyone on here that wants to sell their 6 to an aging passionate aviator please let me know before you put it out in the public arena. RV6s are rarely seen on the market over here, the reason I’m after a 6 is because our Recreational Aircraft is getting a gross weight increase from 600kg to 760kg. The 6 at 1600lbs and 1650lbs fit into that category.
I’ve been looking through the window here for quite a while now, and I think this place is quite unique in how you all operate together.
Anyway wish me luck I am a patient man, most of the time.
Thanks
 
I sold my RV7 to a guy who just snail mailed every single owner on the CASA register.
If you do the same for 6s I bet you’ll get a significant response. There’s heaps of them around. Good idea trying to do it RAA too.
Worth a try.
 
Cheers thanks Richard, great idea I’ll give it a go. So CASA has the addresses on line? I went and got a class 2 medical, so I can fly group G aircraft, no need to fork out 30k for a PPL my RPC with endorsements will let me fly the 6 it’s been a long haul by RAA to get this through.
 
Yep. The register is public unfortunately!
There are a few different websites that scrape it all which provide the data in a better format. 16right.com for example
 
  • Like
Reactions: JPC
Just thinking aloud, but have you considered a 7 or a 9 and reducing the declared MTOW? It is common in Europe to downrate light twins to 2,000kg to avoid Eurocontrol en route charges, so it is a well trodden path. You'll obviously lose some useful load but if you start with an aircraft that's not a porker, it might still have great utility, especially if you normally fly solo.
 
The key issue here in Australia is that in order to qualify for RAAUS (and the associated reduced regulatory/medical burden) the original kit manufacturers MTOW is the criteria. Not an arbitrary weight assigned by the builder.
That’s been tried here too. Mostly unsuccessfully.
 
Most good aeroplanes go before they are advertised...
Some local networking can often pay dividends.
 
Another thought: place an ad in one or more of the aircraft trade pubs if you want to buy an RV-6. I suspect many folks thinking of selling their aircraft will look there to get an idea of value, etc. Good luck with the search.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I am sorry for your frustration... But the title of your thread is the story of my life. :)

I have no idea what the RV market is like. I know post World Wide "Panorama" ;) prices on used planes of all kinds went through the roof... $60K C152 and RV10's for $350K.... It JUST may be, not be, maybe, a good time to buy?

IF you have enough money, you can buy a plane. Many RV's are bought locally by people who know the person. Good RV's are fair price sell fast or already spoken for before being advertised. I personally would avoid buying one abroad.

DO not get emotionally attached with a plane or the idea of buying a plane until YOU DO A COMPLEETE pre-inspection. It is better to have $100,000 in your pocket wishing you had a plane than spending $100,000 wishing you did not have that plane.

Unsolicited advice worth every penny you are paying for it: Lower your sights to a used RV-4? GREAT PLANE (may be the best RV?) RV-4 is as good or frankly better in many ways (built and owned both). I like side by side but the RV-4 is great. Richard "Dick" VanGrunsven when asked what his favorite RV was? He said RV-3. You tend to find RV-4's for less. They tend to be older, more VFR, lower HP (150-160), fixed prop... etc.... Trust me a LIGHT weight, RV-4, 160HP, FP wood prop, VFR is a joy to fly. RV-9, RV-12? Open up your options.
A loaded RV-6 with all the bells and whistles tend sto be overweight and lose some RV magic. (Overweight = more than VA's Spec target empty weight.) I have flown heavy RV's and light ones. You notice. Check empty weight. Max gross weight RV-6 is 1600 lbs, RV-6A 1650. Empty weight . RV-6/RV-6A specified empty weighs 965lbs/985lbs respectively. If an RV-6 weighs 1160 lbs empty (yes there are RV-6's out there, +1100lbs empty). With gross weight 1600 lb, full fuel you have 440lbs useful. Fuel 38x6=228lbs. So now you have 212lbs for Pilot/Pax/bags. Lets say you want to fly two 180lb occupants, 360lbs. You need to lose 158 lbs fuel or 26 gal. That leaves 12 gal remaining.. Assume 8 gal/hr. That is 1.5 hrs endurance. Subtract 30 min VFR reserve. About 60 min flying.
AEROBATIC max gross is 1375 lbs..... No way a fat RV, with two up. Even if an RV-6 is a lean, 965 lbs empty, that leaves 410 lbs. So you can fly two people assuming 180lbs. THAT 180 lbs per person includes weight for the required parachutes to do aerobatics with two people. Leaving fuel behind is required. You will have fuel for short (30 min) aerobatic flight. Respect the limits.
Van made the RV-6 for 160 hp and fixed wood prop in mind, like he did for the RV-4. Mid 80's C/S props and 180-200HP engines were kind of rare in RV's, but quickly 180HP and C/S props became the preferred. People started to shoe horn in the heavier IO360(200HP) into RV's. This is why the RV7, RV-8 and RV-14 came out. The latter RV-14 is made for a IO360/IO390 +200HP engines and has 2050 lb gross. Than the heavy car engines came. Woof... TIP: The price on a car engine RV is much lower. I almost bought one to convert back to a Lycoming. BIG ENGINES and C/S props - Remember 20 more HP does not make the RV significantly faster. Constant speed prop does shorten T/O run and increases climb, and also makes approach easier (with more idle drag in fine pitch/high RPM) and slightly shorter roll out. In cruise, same HP, speeds of your fixed prop RV if pitched properly can be almost or as fast as a C/S prop. However the C/S prop will be more efficient in cruise, less RPM, less noise, saving a few bucks in gas. Think car manual 6 speed transmission, driving down freeway, C/S prop you are in 6th gear, FP prop you are 5th gear. C/S prop from a stop light you use 1st gear. FP prop you use 2nd gear. Not a prefect analogy but you get the point. C/S prop is better, but cost way more and is heavier.
Many RV-6 owners just arbitrarily ignore the limits and even annotate the limitations as such, with higher gross limit. When automotive engines were the rage late 90's early 2000's, RV's were over gross even SOLO! Many loaded up RV-6's, angle valve 360's. metal Hartzell CS prop, fancy paint, upholstery, loaded panel. Although a IO360 angle valve is less than a car engine, the 200HP RV-6's had less useful load, I call useless useful load. It is just math. I would not buy a fat RV-6 unless you buy a truck load of ozempic. As I said 160HP, fixed wood prop, VFR panel, simple interior, light weight paint job (not multi layers of top and clear coat) is a joy.
If you and your favorite passenger(s) are on the larger side and want to do cross country with bags, buy a RV-7 or RV-14. Yes they may be more money used, but they are PRE_PUNCHED. That is good if you ever need to repair a wing or stabilizer leading edge (bird strike). RV-6 was drilled in assembly by the builder and pattern is not standard. Not a big deal to me, as you can always drill new blanks, but pre-punch is awesome. Interchangeable parts is a thing.
DECIDE what you want vs. what you need.


I JUST WATCHED a great EAA Webinar that just came out this week, during annual "Homebuilders Week".

"Webinar- Buying a Used Van’s RV Aircraft"

This was presented by Vic Syracuse. . Even if someone is an experienced A&P, DAR, even RV builder, you can miss things. I am not selling Vic's books, but as a 12 time plane builder and operator he has good points. He wrote two books one Maintenance of RV's and one Pre Buy.... They are not cheap. I do not own these books nor do I plan on buying them. Just FYI they may be of great use to a perspective buyer of used RV's..... When you do buy an RV and become an operator, but never operated/owned one, maintenance is key. That maintenance book could be golden to you. There is a learning curve. RV's do wear, need to be maintained and repaired routinely. Since you can do most of this work best be ready. I suppose you can just bring it to a shop who works on RV's, but doing it yourself is part of the fun. My first 1000 hrs of flying my RV, I found, most of the issues for me were FWF, due to vibration, rubbing, fretting, fatigue, wear, cracking (baffle). I repaired, improved, modified many issues to reduce or eliminate the issues. A mature RV that has ben well maintained, fine tuned can be a great value vs a low time hardly flown RV, that has not gone through the teething / break-in (broken-in) period. RV flown and in disrepair or have slip shot band aid repairs, should be avoided. Also LOOK for cracks in the elevator and rudder. Very common. The skins are thin and crack near the last trailing edge stiffener to skin rivet. The reasons are well known. There are building techniques that can assure cracking, and techniques that virtually eliminate it. Things like this are tribal knowledge you should try to understand. BTW that elevator crack is sometimes fixed with stop drill and a blob of sealant injected. I had a crack in one of my RV-4's aileron for another reason than stiffener. I bought new parts and rebuilt it. Stop drill is temporary to me.

At least watch the EAA video (you must be an EAA member). Any one who is not an EAA member may you always have headwinds.... (kidding). If not an EAA member join.
 
Last edited:
He wrote two books one Maintenance of RV's and Pre Buy.... They are not cheap. I do not own these books nor do I plan on buying them. Just FYI they may be of great use to a perspective buyer of used RV's.....
An unsolicited plug for Vic’s Syracuse’s RV maintenance book — I bought it as soon as it came out and it has already saved me far more than the purchase price. Obviously it’s particularly useful for people who (like me) buy used RVs, and therefore lack the insights that builders gain along the way. But heck, I bet even most builders would benefit. Vic has seen a LOT of RVs.
 
An unsolicited plug for Vic’s Syracuse’s RV maintenance book — I bought it as soon as it came out and it has already saved me far more than the purchase price. Obviously it’s particularly useful for people who (like me) buy used RVs, and therefore lack the insights that builders gain along the way. But heck, I bet even most builders would benefit. Vic has seen a LOT of RVs.
This is a fantastic book, should come with every RV.
 
It is better to have $100,000 in your pocket wishing you had a plane than spending $100,000 wishing you did not have that plane.
This was my thinking for many years as I was looking for my next plane. It really works to avoid buying a lemon or something you really didn't want.
 
The key issue here in Australia is that in order to qualify for RAAUS (and the associated reduced regulatory/medical burden) the original kit manufacturers MTOW is the criteria. Not an arbitrary weight assigned by the builder.
That’s been tried here too. Mostly unsuccessfully.

The key issue is trying to fly RVs on the RAAus register :)

CASA is about to promulgate Class 5 self-declared medicals (this month, if their assurances are worth anything).
They've already done Part 61 RPL, which is RAAus-equivalent.
They're a year late on Part 43, but when that comes out a non-builder will be able to qualify for an AMTC-3.

An RPL holder with an AMTC-3 and a Class 5 is, in all meaningful respects, like an RAAus RPC holder who can self declare their medical and perform their own maintenance.

Except they don't have aircraft registration fees, they don't have annual membership fees, they can fly in controlled airspace, they don't have a 600kg limit, and they have a pathway for add-on aerobatics, NVFR and IFR ratings if they want them.

Anyone in Australia looking for an RV would be foolish for wanting to put it on the RAAus register. Extra expense for extra rules and limitations. No bueno.

I know some people have tried, and there are RV-9's and RV-4's (and at least one RV-7) on the RAAus register. Very limited, but if that's what they want, that's fine. They did it under regulations from ten years ago. I think it'd be very short-sighted to do it with the regulations we have now, or the regulations we should have this year.

- mark
 
The key issue here in Australia is that in order to qualify for RAAUS (and the associated reduced regulatory/medical burden) the original kit manufacturers MTOW is the criteria. Not an arbitrary weight assigned by the builder.
That’s been tried here too. Mostly unsuccessfully.
No, it isn't.

I built my RV-9A and registered it - as a 2 seater to boot - with RAAus as amateur-built. Flew it for years before my usual Coey's got heavy enough that the payload remaining for fuel was insufficient then swapped it to VH-. If CAsA want to play silly-buggers with my C2 in years to come and I haven't replaced it with a 4-seater, I'll put it back into RAAus, too, but realistically, you're better off with it being VH-.

Fly RAAus for your RPC & Nav's, submit the form to CAsA to get your RPL, do a GA flight test, and fly without having to pay annual fees. The only benefit to RAAus these days is the members insurance policy - but to say you can't register a 2-seat RV with 'em isn't accurate.
 
I think the OP was working on the assumption that the group G 760kg weight increase was imminent. They have been promising it for around 15y though…
So no problem for a 3/4/6. Plenty of 3s and 4s with numbers not letters. So there will be 6s too. These guys aren’t interested in CTA, Aeros, formation, night, IFR etc. They just want to tool around in rural areas off their own strips for fun and have nothing to do with CASA or Avmed.

I predict there’ll be a number of VH reg going across to RA when the weight limit goes up.
 
No, it isn't.

I built my RV-9A and registered it - as a 2 seater to boot - with RAAus as amateur-built. Flew it for years before my usual Coey's got heavy enough that the payload remaining for fuel was insufficient then swapped it to VH-. If CAsA want to play silly-buggers with my C2 in years to come and I haven't replaced it with a 4-seater, I'll put it back into RAAus, too, but realistically, you're better off with it being VH-.

Fly RAAus for your RPC & Nav's, submit the form to CAsA to get your RPL, do a GA flight test, and fly without having to pay annual fees. The only benefit to RAAus these days is the members insurance policy - but to say you can't register a 2-seat RV with 'em isn't accurate.
as the proposal currently stands you won’t be able to register an aircraft with RA-AUS under group G if the kit manufacturer says the MTOW > 760kg.
What you theoretically can do now is another matter.
 
I predict there’ll be a number of VH reg going across to RA when the weight limit goes up.

Again: Why? What is the benefit for the pilot/owner, when CASA have set an expectation that Part 43 (with AMTC-3) and Class 5 medicals are coming up this year?

(I know it's been 15 years of to-and-fro and I confess I've lost track, but doesn't the current RA weight limit increase proposal insist that group G aircraft are LAME maintained?)

If VH reg go across to RA when the weight limit goes up, that'll just limit the aircraft's capabilities (and resale value) and add annual fees for membership and registration, and add maintenance costs, for no good reason.

RA has, for many years, been the place pilots go when they think CASA is about to pull their medical. They can sign up, pay the fee, and keep flying light sport until they're ready to give it away.

But this year's tranches of regulatory changes will up-end that. Part 91 ops on a Part 61 license with a self-declared medical should be cheaper and (mostly) less restrictive than RAAus. What would be the advantage to moving VH reg aircraft to RA when the weight limit goes up?

("Class 5 medicals won't allow formation flight," is a pretty niche demand)

- mark

(apologies to the Americans reading this, these nuances must seem mystifying and inscrutable :)
 
as the proposal currently stands you won’t be able to register an aircraft with RA-AUS under group G if the kit manufacturer says the MTOW > 760kg.
What you theoretically can do now is another matter.
Yes - you can!

Because the "Kit supplier" is not the manufacturer of the airframe as registered, and the MTOW specified by the updated CAO95.55 is defined by the Act & Regulations to be specified by the airframe manufacturer - ie the builder. This is a major problem with RAAus - what they think the regulations say, and what they actually say, are not always the same...The builder sets the MTOW - though it's a moot point in any event as 760*2.2046 = 1,675Lbs, smack in the middle of the range Vans specifies for the -9's anyway...

I had similar problems when I was registering my -9 with them until I told them (diplomatically as I could) they were full of it and to actually go read the legislation we operate under, after which they (begrudgingly) accepted my 9 on the register.
 
As of May 19, 2020 that is no longer correct. The Van's recommended Maximum Gross Weight is now 1650 pounds for both the RV-6 and RV-6A.

Ref: "RV-6/6A Weight and Balance – updated to reflect new RV-6 gross weight limit and to remove limits on aircraft with U-00019 nose gear legs."
Thanks yes I saw that but went with original 1600 lbs for the example. 50 lbs is a help, about an hour of fuel. The point is limited useful load with high empty weights, and does not change aerobatic weight.

The question is if your operating limits were written for 1600 lbs, can you just change it? Re-do Phase 1? I assume you can just change it.... I'm not sure.
 
Again: Why? What is the benefit for the pilot/owner, when CASA have set an expectation that Part 43 (with AMTC-3) and Class 5 medicals are coming up this year?

(I know it's been 15 years of to-and-fro and I confess I've lost track, but doesn't the current RA weight limit increase proposal insist that group G aircraft are LAME maintained?)

If VH reg go across to RA when the weight limit goes up, that'll just limit the aircraft's capabilities (and resale value) and add annual fees for membership and registration, and add maintenance costs, for no good reason.

RA has, for many years, been the place pilots go when they think CASA is about to pull their medical. They can sign up, pay the fee, and keep flying light sport until they're ready to give it away.

But this year's tranches of regulatory changes will up-end that. Part 91 ops on a Part 61 license with a self-declared medical should be cheaper and (mostly) less restrictive than RAAus. What would be the advantage to moving VH reg aircraft to RA when the weight limit goes up?

("Class 5 medicals won't allow formation flight," is a pretty niche demand)

- mark

(apologies to the Americans reading this, these nuances must seem mystifying and inscrutable :)
Yeah I agree on paper that there's limited difference between the two paths. some of the differences may or may not appeal to different operators at the margin.
in practise though there is an entire generation of pilots for whom CASA has poisoned the well and now that they are getting older, they just want nothing to do with them. if the tradeoff is a yearly fee - or LAME maintenance, they'll take it.
Yes - you can!

Because the "Kit supplier" is not the manufacturer of the airframe as registered, and the MTOW specified by the updated CAO95.55 is defined by the Act & Regulations to be specified by the airframe manufacturer - ie the builder. This is a major problem with RAAus - what they think the regulations say, and what they actually say, are not always the same...The builder sets the MTOW - though it's a moot point in any event as 760*2.2046 = 1,675Lbs, smack in the middle of the range Vans specifies for the -9's anyway...

I had similar problems when I was registering my -9 with them until I told them (diplomatically as I could) they were full of it and to actually go read the legislation we operate under, after which they (begrudgingly) accepted my 9 on the register.
Im well aware of how the law is written.
The unfortunate spate of 7-800kg airframes flying around with "one seat" and "half tanks" to get down to the 600kg limit set the MTOW increase cause back many years. I would be hard overstate just how much bad blood that caused between RAAUS and CASA. Many jimmies rustled. Not a secret.
Its my relatively well informed view that the current proposal has been explicitly designed to prevent this happening again.
RV7? Hard no. RV6? Yes. RV9 with a fixed pitch timber prop and an 0-235? Probably yes. RV9 with a CS and IO320/360? No.

But my point is it'll be the "kit designers" MTOW. Not the "builders or manufacturers" MTOW.
Dont take my word for it. Ring and ask. Its not a secret.
 
But my point is it'll be the "kit designers" MTOW. Not the "builders or manufacturers" MTOW.
Dont take my word for it. Ring and ask. Its not a secret.
No need to - it's on their website already...

But again, that's not what CAO95.55 says! And that's the problem. What RAAus say, and think they can do is not what the CAO's we operate under actually say. When I registered my -9 with 'em, I got all kinds of excuses from "You need fuel for the seats * half the HP" (except that clause was specific to LSA's only, not E-AB), to "the stall speed is too high", to "you can load it over gross", to "Why do you want to put an RV in RAAus?" - not one refusal actually lined up with the CAO's and when I pointed that out to them, my RV-9, with an O-340 and 2 seats wound up with numbers on the side for several years, as is allowed to happen again.

I shouldn't have had to tell their tech manager their rules. That's what we pay them for...If they want to play silly buggers, they'll eventually get put in their place - again - by someone who knows the rules.
 
No need to - it's on their website already...

But again, that's not what CAO95.55 says! And that's the problem. What RAAus say, and think they can do is not what the CAO's we operate under actually say. When I registered my -9 with 'em, I got all kinds of excuses from "You need fuel for the seats * half the HP" (except that clause was specific to LSA's only, not E-AB), to "the stall speed is too high", to "you can load it over gross", to "Why do you want to put an RV in RAAus?" - not one refusal actually lined up with the CAO's and when I pointed that out to them, my RV-9, with an O-340 and 2 seats wound up with numbers on the side for several years, as is allowed to happen again.

I shouldn't have had to tell their tech manager their rules. That's what we pay them for...If they want to play silly buggers, they'll eventually get put in their place - again - by someone who knows the rules.
Yep. And ruin it again for another decade for everyone else who wants a legitimate MTOW increase.
 
I’d like to thank everyone for their help, I’ve found a RV6 in Arkansas, so the next question is does anyone here know of a company that will disassemble and crate the plane for export? The RV is located near Little Rock.
Thanks again everyone and to the aussies that helped I’m looking at the VH rego.
 
I would have thought importing an A/C these days into Oz would be cost prohibitive? As for going RA I see no benefit, in fact it costs more!…..once the Part 43 hits the streets RA for many will be not needed! I have an L1 authority to maintain my RA planes (they were already on their register when I bought them all) but my VH experimental I can’t go beyond sched 8 pilot maintenanc, roll on part 43, goodbye the millionaires club RAaus!
 
Don’t know if this is the right place to post this but here I go.
After 12 months of searching for a straight tidy rv6. I’ve bid on numerous planes that could’ve been but aren’t mine, I’m a little disheartened that I’ll ever get into a 6. Two in Europe fell through because of a gross weight issue and another because I’m on the other side of the planet and got beaten to the punch. The other two were in the US, I’m in Australia, again beaten to the finishing post. So I thought I’d post here and see if I can’t get a heads up on a 6. Meaning if there’s anyone on here that wants to sell their 6 to an aging passionate aviator please let me know before you put it out in the public arena. RV6s are rarely seen on the market over here, the reason I’m after a 6 is because our Recreational Aircraft is getting a gross weight increase from 600kg to 760kg. The 6 at 1600lbs and 1650lbs fit into that category.
I’ve been looking through the window here for quite a while now, and I think this place is quite unique in how you all operate together.
Anyway wish me luck I am a patient man, most of the time.
Thanks
I’m building (to sell,) a RV6 with a rebuilt O-320 , dual 7” Non touch Garmin G3X, TruTrac auto pilot.
Come to Fort Worth and finish it up with me to your specs .
 

Attachments

  • IMG_5779.jpeg
    IMG_5779.jpeg
    1.9 MB · Views: 73
  • 72169154358__68989E21-FA1A-47BC-A4C5-370CC66A14F8.jpeg
    72169154358__68989E21-FA1A-47BC-A4C5-370CC66A14F8.jpeg
    1.6 MB · Views: 69
Don’t know if this is the right place to post this but here I go.
After 12 months of searching for a straight tidy rv6. I’ve bid on numerous planes that could’ve been but aren’t mine, I’m a little disheartened that I’ll ever get into a 6. Two in Europe fell through because of a gross weight issue and another because I’m on the other side of the planet and got beaten to the punch. The other two were in the US, I’m in Australia, again beaten to the finishing post. So I thought I’d post here and see if I can’t get a heads up on a 6. Meaning if there’s anyone on here that wants to sell their 6 to an aging passionate aviator please let me know before you put it out in the public arena. RV6s are rarely seen on the market over here, the reason I’m after a 6 is because our Recreational Aircraft is getting a gross weight increase from 600kg to 760kg. The 6 at 1600lbs and 1650lbs fit into that category.
I’ve been looking through the window here for quite a while now, and I think this place is quite unique in how you all operate together.
Anyway wish me luck I am a patient man, most of the time.
Thanks

Don’t know if this is the right place to post this but here I go.
After 12 months of searching for a straight tidy rv6. I’ve bid on numerous planes that could’ve been but aren’t mine, I’m a little disheartened that I’ll ever get into a 6. Two in Europe fell through because of a gross weight issue and another because I’m on the other side of the planet and got beaten to the punch. The other two were in the US, I’m in Australia, again beaten to the finishing post. So I thought I’d post here and see if I can’t get a heads up on a 6. Meaning if there’s anyone on here that wants to sell their 6 to an aging passionate aviator please let me know before you put it out in the public arena. RV6s are rarely seen on the market over here, the reason I’m after a 6 is because our Recreational Aircraft is getting a gross weight increase from 600kg to 760kg. The 6 at 1600lbs and 1650lbs fit into that category.
I’ve been looking through the window here for quite a while now, and I think this place is quite unique in how you all operate together.
Anyway wish me luck I am a patient man, most of the time.
Thanks
Hello, I may have your 6. Selling as I have aged out and partner fighting cancer. Not advertised yet. N633DM, total time 736hrs, built 2006, original factory Lycoming 0360 A21A, 180HP, Hartzell constant speed. Basic panel, TruTrak A/P. Located Phoenix, AZ. $82,500. Please send email if interested.
Don’t know if this is the right place to post this but here I go.
After 12 months of searching for a straight tidy rv6. I’ve bid on numerous planes that could’ve been but aren’t mine, I’m a little disheartened that I’ll ever get into a 6. Two in Europe fell through because of a gross weight issue and another because I’m on the other side of the planet and got beaten to the punch. The other two were in the US, I’m in Australia, again beaten to the finishing post. So I thought I’d post here and see if I can’t get a heads up on a 6. Meaning if there’s anyone on here that wants to sell their 6 to an aging passionate aviator please let me know before you put it out in the public arena. RV6s are rarely seen on the market over here, the reason I’m after a 6 is because our Recreational Aircraft is getting a gross weight increase from 600kg to 760kg. The 6 at 1600lbs and 1650lbs fit into that category.
I’ve been looking through the window here for quite a while now, and I think this place is quite unique in how you all operate together.
Anyway wish me luck I am a patient man, most of the time.
Thanks
Hello, I may have your 6. Selling as aged out and partner fighting cancer. N633DM,736 hours engine and airframe. Built 2006 factory Lycoming 0360 A1A 180HP, Hartzell C/S. basic panel, TruTrak A/P. Based Phoenix, Arizona. $82,500. Email me if interested: [email protected]. Thanks

 
Hi Richard,
Email sent. The photo link didn’t work for me so maybe email would be better.
 
Back
Top