What's new
Van's Air Force

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

Just wondering Sling TSi better option?

CJT

CJT

Active Member
I have already invested heavily in building RV10
The facility where I am building has been assisting with Sling build too
I find,
Sling colored build plans are much better
Most rivets are pulled, saving time and not requiring two persons
Faster build time
Has lighter Rotax 4 cylinder turbocharged engine that is burning less fuel, hence cost saving over time
It’s a FADEC engine with built in electronic ignition, single lever control, much modern than antique Lycoming
Performs better at 15,000 feet
Also has high wing option
Growing company
God forbid, if Vans closes, where will we get parts from
 
I think it’s a very comparable aircraft in a lot of ways. Not sure it’s better, just a different approach to the comfortable cruising four seat design.
 
The Tsi is a fine airplane, and I enjoy flying them. And yes, you’ll have more horsepower up above, oh…12 or 14 thousand than with a normally-aspirated -10. But the -10 has more room and more baggage capacity. So if you’re looking for a great airplane for two with lots of baggage, the Tsi could satisfy. If you want to be able to haul more people and stuff, the -10 is maybe a better choice.

The Tsi is pricey, of course….and so is the -10 (for those of us that remember the good old days when we homebuilt to save money…..
 
I flew the sling TSI last year before I decided to build the -9 I am working on. It is a really nicely flying aircraft very comfortable and much nicer to fly than the 182 I am currently flying. We did wing overs and it does them beautifully you just have to watch it the plan wants to pick up speed really fast in a descent. The pulled rivet build is really nice as well. It is also a bit cheaper than the RV-10 and would definitely be cheaper on fuel.

Downsides are I don't think it is quite as roomy as the -10 and the useful load and airspeed at reasonable operating altitudes is less. I don't have very good data on the maintenance cost on the engine and it might be hard to find a mechanic.

The biggest reasons I decided against it was that by the time I had the money the price had gone up quite a bit. the original price projections for a completed kit before it got to market were around $130K if you did everything yourself. by the time I flew it it was more like $160K with basic panel and north of $180K with a full IFR. Of course if you use the build assist it will be north of $300K.

The other thing that got me was when i went out for insurance quotes for a pilot with 250 hours and an instrument rating they were wanting $5500 per year for insurance on a hull value of $180K. The insurance companies just don't have much data on these aircraft yet. That might come down at some point but I couldn't spend that much money on a maybe. I didn't have the budget for a -10 the TSI price was already pushing it so I am build an RV-9 instead.
 
TSI vs RV10

I completed my RV8 now 3 years ago and then wanted to replace my 40 year old Cherokee 180 with a new 4=place aircraft. I wanted to avoid spending the rest of my life building a buck riveted aircraft and to build a plane with both modern avionics and engine. My wife also wanted a plane that had a parachute option. Since I had flown several Sling 2 and 4 seat Sling aircraft the decision came pretty easy. The upfront cost was not cheap, but I was convinced that overall it would be a better investment for me.

I had flown the RV10 a number of times and knew clearly what a great plane it was but I also knew what it takes to build a Vans aircraft. I was the third builder on my RV8, each of the previous builders had started with great expectations they would someday be flying a beautiful RV8 they had built themselves, but after 21 years from the start of its build I was able to finish and get it flying. I do feel story for its previous builders, they did great work and put their heart and sole into my plane.

My TSI is a quick build kit, Sling also sells a complete flat pack kit, but either way you go a TSI kit aircraft I believe will be 3 times faster to build (I.e. give back many years of your life that would otherwise be spent building an airplane many folks will never finish) than a RV10 for the average builder. The TSI aircraft flies very nice. It’s not a RV8, but it’s an awesome comfortable x country aircraft. The kits come very complete right down to a beautiful leather interior, landing lights, and about 10 different Loctite for various components. The US Sling distributor in Torrance CA has educated several insurance companies over the last year and rates have definitely dropped. Most of you know the Sling aircraft designers have flown both their 2 and 4 seat Sling aircraft around the world several times to advertise it capabilities and the reliability of the Rotax engines. Last spring I attended the Factory authorized Rotax 5 day maintenance school that taught me lot and actually made me a factory qualified light and medium maintenance Rotax mechanic.

Bottom line is the Sling aircraft TSi or new High Wing are modern aircraft and worthy competitors to the RV10 and should give shoppers some new ways to compare the building time as well as ownership cost and flying enjoyment if your out looking for a new experimental aircraft.
 
Last edited:
To compare the shiny new object which is Sling aircraft to the 50 years of success that has produced the RV10 is laughable IMO. To compare a Lycoming equipped aircraft to one with a Rotax is laughable IMO. A friend showed up in his 120 hr Sling to take me for a ride and after picking the air vent up off the floor so I wouldn’t step on it and then watching him run it up with a prop controller flashing 3 red lights and changing pitch at will was almost laughable. But instead, I told him to taxi me back to my hangar cause I’m not going up in this with him. The “builder assist” program out of Torrance looks like an obvious violation of the FAA 51% rule to me. Not so laughable. Didn’t one of the demonstrators crash in San Pedro recently and literally broke in half behind the cockpit? That one is definitely not laughable.

To compare a Sling to an RV is a joke IMO but hey, it’s got a parachute and they’ve got a good marketing dept.
 
It’s a good product and not laughable

Anyone can screw up a good product. Plastic vents by Vans was also laughable. Seen lots of RV’s that I wouldn’t fly in. Rans also makes a nice product.

Rotax is used by Vans now in non RV -12’s. Also not laughable.
 
Last edited:
I’ve been helping a buddy of mine with his quick build TSI this year.
It should be flying very soon.
I’ve been nothing but impressed by the quality of the parts, documentation, hardware, organization. No manufacturer or airframe design is perfect as we know.
Vans could definitely learn a few things from sling - and sling from vans.
 
But the -10 has more room and more baggage capacity. So if you’re looking for a great airplane for two with lots of baggage, the Tsi could satisfy. If you want to be able to haul more people and stuff, the -10 is maybe a better choice.



I agree with Paul. I sat in the Tsi at OSH this year. Made a point to climb into the back seat. IMO the Tsi is a great 2-3 person airplane. The -10 is a great 4 person airplane.
I'm not a big guy at 5'8" and had to crane my neck to the side in the back seat.
 
Last edited:
Very nice discussion
Enjoyed reading each and every post
Thank you all for joining in
 
I seriously considered Sling when I was looking to build my first airplane. The deal breaker for me was the fact that Sling is based in South Africa while Vans is located three hours away from me.
 
No comparison

I also find it laughable to compare the RV-10 to the Sling.

Don't get me wrong, the Sling looks to be a nice airplane but it is an apples to oranges comparison. Yes, the Sling has 4 seats like the -10 but that's about it. Unless you are less than 5'10" and 150 lbs, the Sling is going to be tight...and it's worse in the back seat. I sat in the Sling and it was truly uncomfortable.

I don't necessarily have an issue with the Rotax but trying to compare a 140hp engine to a 260 hp (minimum) engine is again, laughable.

The Sling is more like an LSA...and the RV-10 is not.
 
Rocketman, thank you! I was about to respond saying this is an RV forum, there has been 700 views, 10 responses, and only one guy defending this great company and this great product by _stating the obvious_. There’s the answer to you low fundraising problem Doug, your demographic has changed.

( oh, I guess I did say it..:))
 
I tried to sit in a Sling in the front seat and half my head was outside the doorframe. Forget trying to close it. I swear those YouTube celebrities that they used to advertise were all like 5'2" or something...

It seems there is a trend in the experimental world that you can make a faster plane by taking a plane for regular sized people and shrinking it thus reducing drag. That is the sense I got from the zeitgeist behind Sling products.
 
It's not rocket science: One of the oldest tricks in the aerospace book for making a vehicle go faster (on a given amount of engine power or thrust) is to make it as small as you can.

Just look at the Cozy Mk IV: similar speed and engines as a two-seat RV but it can seat four! How? The trick is revealed in the name...

I have never sat inside a Sling but it simply can't be as roomy as an RV-10, just from the fact that the Sling carries four people and goes as fast as it does on so few horsepower.

That having been said, please don't listen to old-timers who grumble about Rotax engines and/or blind rivets. Spend enough time with an RV-12 (or any of the many comparable airplanes out there) and you'll see that pulled rivets and four-stroke Rotaxes are just fine and can make life a lot easier.
 
What to build...what to build.....

rocketman1988 said:
I also find it laughable to compare the RV-10 to the Sling......
Click to expand...

Back in the Stone Age when I was considering what to build, there were not many choices. I knew I wanted a tail dragger, fast and good-looking, and aerobatic. I had spent many years working on aluminum airplanes but had NO experience with fiberglass aircraft or construction. My choices were: 1) Lancair (what was I THINKING?): not a tail-dragger; tight cockpit; retractable gear (complex); does not fly well when slowed up; fiberglass; expensive. 2) GlasAir tail dragger: roomier up front; fast; not bad looking; fiberglass, again; when the tail came down, everything disappears (not great visibility). Both of these were side-by-side and I was born and raised on tandem. 3) RV-4: tail dragger; cool-looking; fast but slow, when needed (not true with the other designs); aerobatic; tandem; familiar aluminum construction; less expensive than the other designs. And I had several friends who had built theirs and were flying, eager to take a prospective builder up for a ride!

Obviously, I chose wisely: my RV-4. Let's see: is Lancair still around? The company, no; the support group, yes. Hmmmmmm. Glasair.....Has evolved and now sells a pretty cool airplane that is NOTHING like the original designs. And how many Glasair taildraggers to you see on the ramp or at OSH? I have a friend that it was his first build and loved it. Until a friend wrecked it. Now he flies a Cabin Waco!

Vans: still around; still selling or supporting all of the aircraft (including the -6) it has designed. An AMAZING community of supporters from first-time builders to people who might (actually!) have been involved with the Space Shuttle! ;) Great, proven aircraft that have been build Worldwide with some in far-reaching places and active on this forum! Some have been flying their RVs for decades! Fast but are very good at flying slowly; fun; friendly; still being sold. And more have been sold and flying than ANY other E AB aircraft!

Bottom line: choose wisely! Vans has been around a LONG TIME and, likely, not going ANYwhere! The Sling might be a great aircraft/company but does not have the background (yet) that we enjoy as RV builders!:)

IMHO; there are, of course, pilots who LOVE their Lancair and Glasair aircraft. Don't know anyone who has a Sling that I could go fly if I hadn't made up my mind yet......RV flyers? Everywhere!
 
Last edited:
I've sat in a Sling - it's a nice plane and has good performance. However, as mentioned above, it's a smaller airplane. The 10 is bigger and faster at most altitudes and if you throttle it back you'll get comparable fuel burns and performance to the Sling (why you'd want to do that is beyond me but you could). So really other than superficial similarities, 4 seats, low wing, etc, it's not really an apples-to-apples comparison--more like a 172 is to a 182. I'd take a hard look at your mission, finances and try to sit in and fly both before committing one way or the other.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top