I bought a project that already had a VERY expensive pitot-static tube as part of its inventory, so I used it, along with aft-fuse static ports from one popular vendor. I installed an alternate static toggle switch in the panel to be able to go back and forth between either static source. But the static source from the pitot-static tube always indicated different ALT/AS than the aft-fuse ports and, like Paul says, it did take HOURS of flight testing and data crunching to prove which of the two sources was more correct. Both had significant error, particularly at higher airspeeds. I tried putting rubber washers in front of the static ports on the pitot-static tube, but this did not help. I taped metal washers around the aft-fuse static ports, which helped but was ugly.
If I had the ability to move the pitot-static tube fore and aft there is a CHANCE that I might have found a location with acceptable static position error, but in looking at plots of the pressure distibution around the RV-7 airfoil (provided by Kevin Horton), even that is probably questionable.
In the end, I removed the toggle switch and disconnected the pitot-static tube static source, and replicated the Vans aft-fuse static port which yielded the best results I saw.
Take it from me, don't waste your time or money, the Vans static ports are DEFINITELY the way to go. As others have indicated in this forum, there is no known case of the stock static ports (both) having frozen over!