7 emph & tools

[Joe Parish]

I have a guy that lives near me selling a 7 emph with only the left elevator left to finish. he is selling the emph and phnuematic squeezer and 3x rivet gun for $2250. Not sure but he must also have a c-frame not sure if that goes with? He says in his ad he will not split them up. Wondering how much I could get out of the 7 emph if I bought it and just kept the tools. Not sure if it is worth the hassle. I am really leaning towards doing a 9. Will try to contact him tomorrow. Any input appreciated

[captain_john]

Joe, Build the -7. It does everything the -9 can do and more.

CJ

[hydroguy2]

Here's what I think.....you can do better IF you really want a used kit.

new prices:
$1700 tail kit w/ pre-plans
$400 squeezer
$150 rivet gun

So total with shipping will be about $2400. There is a lot of learning the goes on while building the tail kit....valuable learning.

If I was looking at a used kit, I would try to find one unstarted. There are plenty out there for less money. Also build YOUR plane not what someone else thinks you should build.

I'm building a -7 because I thought I wanted the extra 15mph top speed, when in truth I could have been completely satisfied with a O-320 powered -9 or -9a....and saved $10-15K.

[Spike]

If you are after tools, buy the tools that you want. Its not worth the hassle. By the time you are done with the project a few hundred dollars savings will pale in comparison to your time invested, the experience gained, and getting exactly what you want. It will also pale in comparison to the amount of total money spent.

Joe, Build the -7. It does everything the -9 can do and more.

Gag me with a maggot.

[captain_john]

If you are after tools, buy the tools that you want. Its not worth the hassle. By the time you are done with the project a few hundred dollars savings will pale in comparison to your time invested, the experience gained, and getting exactly what you want. It will also pale in comparison to the amount of total money spent.

Joe, Build the -7. It does everything the -9 can do and more.

Gag me with a maggot.

I knew that would get you goin'!

CJ

[cjensen]

Take a pass on this deal Joe...There is no way I would want to start the wings without having learned on the tail kit. The learning curve is steep, and if/when parts are messed up, they are MUCH cheaper to replace in the tail kit than the wings. Once the curve turns in to a plateau, you're on to the wings, and it's smooth, ahem...smoother sailing...

Oh, and build the plane you want...CJ is good at what he does, and we don't want you to fall in to his little traps!

[Bob Barrett]

As Chad said skip this deal. It is over priced! I purchased my pneumatic squeezer for $.50 on the dollare of the cost of a new one. About $200.00 The experience on the empenge is good however if you could by the package for $1200 go for it and build the 7 unless you want a training airplane. If the part of the empenge is screwed up it could cost you $1000 for parts to fix it. The tools are over priced!

[Joe Parish]

Thanks for all the input guys! My gut instinct was that I want to build my airplane be it a 7 or 9 variation. I do agree with CJ that a 7 can do all that a 9 can do but I am still up in the air. I do like the idea of being able to do some acro someday. I did speak with a gentleman that lives within 2 miles of me that has built multiple rv's ( he says a few, people that he has built them for say the count is twenty something) he says you can do loops and rolls in a 9 and there are people puttin 200hp in them?(I would not) I am hoping to get to go visit his garage one of these days. I talked to him on saturday and he said we will make it happen. Hoping so he is a very humble man and could be a great resource for me. He is currenly building a 9 to meet LSA requirements.


Brian,

How could you have saved 10-15k by building a 9? Do you mean strictly in the cost of the motor?

Thanks guys

[hydroguy2]

......Brian,

How could you have saved 10-15k by building a 9? Do you mean strictly in the cost of the motor?

Thanks guys

Yep engine and prop. When I decided to build I made a list of what I wanted. One of the requirements was fast to minimize flight time between my properties. If you look at Vans spec's the RV-7 is almost 20mph faster than the RV-9a with the max recommended engines. So I chose the -7 planning on a 200hp IO-360 and C/S prop. That combo would be roughly $35000. I settled on a rebuilt parallel IO-360 and WW200prop for $28000. (don't tell the wife) IF I had built a -9a I could have picked up a brand new ECI O-320 w/ Catto prop for under $15000.

Different planes and different engines for sure, BUT real world cruise would have been <10mph most likely. and for my trip between properties(160nm) that's a blistering 5 minutes....could a bought a lot of 100LL for $13K

[cnpeters]

Brian - how do you figure a new ECI O-320 and Catto prop for 15k? O-320/160hp and 360/180hp engines are almost the same cost from everyone I've checked - Mattituck, Aerosport, etc. And the prop doesn't matter - folks put both c/s and fp props on both - personal preference. Kits are close to the same too, so costs really are not different ($500 difference).
Speed? depends on what you do - I've spoken with several folks who have put IO-360/180hp engines in RV-9A's and love their 190 mph machines. It has a lower Vne than the -7, so one has to be a little more careful (both can not be exceeded in level flight with the engines I mentioned, and yet both can be in a dive. One has to watch Vne in either plane in descent, ANY engine - even a O-235).
As someone who spent months agonizing over whether to build a 7 vs a 9, it really boils down to one major difference - whether you may want to do acro or not. If you think you may want to, you should build the 7. For me, I did not care about it, so bought the -9 (one can do minor acro in a -9 just like a C172, Piper Archer, etc - but you better be skilled at proper technique to avoid overloading the frame).
Other factors were minor - I liked the longer wingspan aesthetically, slower landing speed, better glide ratio.

[Spike]

I do agree with CJ that a 7 can do all that a 9 can do ...

What does that mean? If you look at a spec sheet it might be true to some extent, but when you guys say this you are throwing out all of the handling and behavior / usage profiles of the aircraft. Thats ironic considering that the handling and behavior of these planes is exactly why they are so popular.

I can assure you that the 7 can't do everything the 9 can do. If it could then Van's would not have designed them. Granted this is my opinion just as in the other is your opinions. I just don't get it.

Spike

[lancef53]

What exactly is it that the 9 can do that the 7 can't? Is it mainly the landing speed?

Not trying to start an argument, just wondering.

[Spike]

Fly at max gross weight at 51 MPH.

Higher service ceiling / equal to better climb rate for a given HP.

(Both due to a fatter / higher lift wing / better aspect ratio wing?)

Another one would be having handling characteristics that make my wife more comfortable flying in it and flying it herself.

Another would be better fitting my desired flight profile.


The wing is big part of the differences in specification, if you are merely looking at the cut sheets. Having a more pleasurable touch/feel is something that it does (for me) that the 7's/8's don't do. I am just pointing out that the idea that the argument that the 7 does everything the 9 does, and more, is always colored against ones specific preferences. It might do much (or even most) of what the 9 does, but it does it in a different way.

I could say "The Extra 300L does everything the RV-8 does, and more", but that would be a gross mis-characterization of the 2 aircraft.

Spike

[cnpeters]

The -9 can glide much further in an engine out situation, has a slower landing speed. It has a different airfoil and higher aspect wing - some say it may be a little more stable and smooth for IFR flying, but I have never seen data to prove that. Other than that, there is little difference from the -7 besides the aforementioned acro capability.

[Joe Parish]

Spike,

You make a couple points about the 9 that has me leaning that way. My flight profile which would be X-country trips, and the fact my wife wants to learn to fly. I think a 9 would be more to her liking. I know it is all a compromise and I appreciate all your guys input.

Thanks

[cjensen]

I could say "The Extra 300L does everything the RV-8 does, and more", but that would be a gross mis-characterization of the 2 aircraft.

Spike

LOL!! I would leave it alone right there Spike! Nice!

[captain_john]

Ooooh!

I struck this nerve again!

I need to get back to building now.

Hey, did I tell anyone that Bill H. (in my hangar) gut his airworthiness on his -6 and we are just waiting for weather and my schedule to coincide and it flies!

It taxis really nice and the engine purrs like a kitten!

Mebbe tomorrow will be good enough weather?

News to follow after the flight!

CJ

[hydroguy2]

Great planes no matter which is chosen.

CJ- congrats to your hangar mates -6 getting airworthy.

Carl-...when I started my mission list(2006), I could pick up a ECI O-320 kit(brand new) for 12K(build it myself), add the Catto =$15K.

Last I checked a Base kit 360 is $14K with no guaranteed delivery date. add the 9 to 1 pistons, AFP injection, Superior sump, Pmags and your looking at roughly $21K. Eagle or Aerosport building it will add $3-5K. WW200 prop adds another $8K...don't forget the $1200 governor and cable.

If a person was frugal and went rebuild, you can pickup a good core O-320 and rebuild it for $10-12000. Try to do that these days with a 360.

Also putting a 360 in a -9 didn't even cross my mind as I think there was only 1 or 2 360 powered nines flying back then. When I started I had only ridden in a O-320 powered -6 and -4 and both were outstanding machines. My quest for faster is better was probably not realistic as the real world handling and performance is so close. The -9 wing is actually better for higher DA fields and backcountry grass, not to mention long XC cruising up high. The better glide and slower landing speed is a bonus.

Like I said GREAT planes no matter what.

Would I do it different now?...maybe, since I am more informed now. But I don't regret any of my choices as I will have 1 bad-ass RV.

[captain_john]

CJ- congrats to your hangar mates -6 getting airworthy.

Thanks!

If the weather cooperates it looks like I will test fly it today!

CJ