What's new
Van's Air Force

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

RV-7 vs RV-7A

diamond

Well Known Member
I read plenty of discussion on RV7 vs RV9 (or 7A vs 9A), but here's a newbie question that I need to get a better handle on. Why a 7 vs 7A? or 9 vs 9A for that matter? Maybe start by discussing which is easier to takeoff and land. I have read that a 7 is probably better for grass strips because of less flip over potential, but what are the other considerations?
 
nosewheel or tailwheel, primer or not, tip up or slider,fixed or C/S. All have their own plus's or minus's.

I'm going to get some popcorn, this thread may go into extra innings:D
 
Simple............

You can hit gopher holes in an "A" model and flip over.

Or you can hit tractors in your tail dragger model & destroy the whole front end.

The choice is yours! :D

L.Adamson --- RV6A
 
But seriously........

The A models are better for seeing what's in front, and crosswinds.

The taildragger is more stout on rougher strips. But I'd never compare an RV to a good bush plane such as an Aviat Husky or Cub for back country. With small wheels and wheelpants, the RV just isn't tough enough. But I'd still prefer a tail dragging RV for grass strips, even though many A owners still use grass strips all the time.

L.Adamson ---- RV6A
 
I'm going to get some popcorn, this thread may go into extra innings:D

OK, I'm rolling on the couch from this crack comment. Look forward to some meaty discussion. My very limited understanding tells me to go with a taildragger because of safer landing characteristics on grass and better aerodynamics, but there must be more to it than this. Is one easier to land and takeoff, or is that comparison debatable? Would also be interesting to know out of the last, say 100 kits sold, how many are 7 and how many are 7A. Anyone have an educated guess on this?
 
Last edited:
You've Done it Now...

Diamond, you may or may not realize it, but your query is kind of like asking "What's the best college football team?" But since you're new, maybe the group will be gentle with you. :eek:

If you do a search of your topics on this forum, you'll find more discussion than you can read in a sitting. In general, the 7 is aerobatic and more nimble and the 9 handles more like production aircraft that most of us are used to flying. Of course, all of Van's aircraft handle well and have few vices. The fuselage and cockpit of the 7 & 9 are essentially the same, so it mostly comes down to differences in the wing & empennage design.

And like the others have said, the A's have better visibility on the ground and you won't need a tailwheel endorsement, so your insurance may be less expensive. However, many feel that the tailwheel aircraft is less prone to nose-overs when operating off turf strips. But that's a whole 'nuther can of worms. Any good pilot with proper training can learn how to take off & land a tailwheel aircraft, but it does require a bit more of your attention than a 172.

I think I'm going to go get something to drink and get comfortable, 'cause I'm sure that this ain't the last of this thread...
 
In a futile attempt to short-stop the thread, I think all the tairdragger vs. nose-dragger threads basically end up at the same place. You can fly either version, with proper transition training. From another contributor "build what you want to see when you open the hangar!"
 
Simple............

You can hit gopher holes in an "A" model and flip over.

Or you can hit tractors in your tail dragger model & destroy the whole front end.

The choice is yours! :D

L.Adamson --- RV6A
Had they left a tractor attached to the trailer sitting in the middle of the taxiway, it might have been tall enough that someone sitting in a taildragger RV to see. However, with just the low trailer sitting there, one wouldn't have a chance to see it until after they climbed out of their recently damaged RV. :(

Diamond, go the never ending debate section, scroll to the bottom and click on the boxes that allow you to see all the old threads. There is a ton of stuff on this topic (and others).
 
"What's the best college football team?"



Well, that is an easy one! :rolleyes:

There are the Huskers, and then there are other teams. ;)

Oh, the "A" models have cheaper insurance. I prefer chips & dip over popcorn, the husks get stuck in my teeth.
 
Diamond, go the never ending debate section, scroll to the bottom and click on the boxes that allow you to see all the old threads. There is a ton of stuff on this topic (and others).

Thanks. I read quite a bit in the "never ending debate" section as you suggested and seems quite unanimous/obvious the TD is the way to go. Thanks for pointed me to those threads.
 
debate

Thanks. I read quite a bit in the "never ending debate" section as you suggested and seems quite unanimous/obvious the TD is the way to go. Thanks for pointed me to those threads.

Not sure how you came up with the "unanimous/obvious" comment. There are many "A" builders/flyers out here. I think Mel summed it up best in an earlier thread: "once flying, the airplane doesn't care where the little wheel is." Are you building an airplane to taxi or fly?
 
Not sure how you came up with the "unanimous/obvious" comment. There are many "A" builders/flyers out here. I think Mel summed it up best in an earlier thread: "once flying, the airplane doesn't care where the little wheel is." Are you building an airplane to taxi or fly?

I can't figure than one either. Lot's of A's! Even Van's converted it's taildragging 7 to an A model.

L.Adamson -- RV6A
 
Well and the fact is most (probably at least 60 to 70 percent) of the RV sales over the years have been A models. Mike

You lie! :D Actually, this makes sense considering most folks' flying mission.

Debate on this subject sometimes reminds me of the partisan steadfastness of our current political system and its high-emotion, prickly discourse. Nice to see that we're over going there...entertaining as it may be to watch. :)
 
Then why was the RV10 only built as a Ng..eh?

Frank 7a
Frank,

I think Van’s learned their lesson with the RV-9. They once told me that based on the number of RV-9’s they are selling will never cover the engineering cost and that they should have stopped at the -9A. Thank god they did develop the -9, otherwise I would have finished that -6 I started 10 years ago.

As for the -10 taildragger, could you imagine climbing/clawing your way out of the backset of a -10 taildragger? Besides, it is kind of like putting a sticker on the side of a mini-van that reads, “SPORT”. What exactly is a “SPORT” edition mini-van (or pickup or SUV for that matter)?
 
Then why was the RV10 only built as a Ng..eh?

Frank 7a

Now that you mention it, I can't understand why Bonanzas, Cirrus', and Columbias don't have a tailwheel option either. :D

Aside from the type of planes the -10 is competing with, the mission, and the likely type of airplane someone is moving from, it would probably look about as ridiculous as a taildragger Cherokee I saw once. :)
 
Frank,

I think Van?s learned their lesson with the RV-9. They once told me that based on the number of RV-9?s they are selling will never cover the engineering cost and that they should have stopped at the -9A. Thank god they did develop the -9, otherwise I would have finished that -6 I started 10 years ago.

Don't knock the "6". You might have really liked it! :D

In fact, a 9A owner that I know (real nice plane & nice guy too), likes the performance of my 6A enough.....................that he kind of wishes he went with a 7A instead. It's the second 9A that he's built.

L.Adamson
 
Wow, we are getting good at point to the never ending debate section. :)

I really like what was said earlier. "Build whatever you want to see when you open the hanger" Nice.
 
Back
Top