RV 10 variable costs

[- Poindexter -]

Looking at moving up from my RV 7a to the RV 10, for several reasons. Wanted to see if folks could share their variable costs (gas, oil, maintenance, etc). Better yet, if someone has gone from the 7a to 10 experience.

Not interested in the fixed costs (plane, hangar, insurance, etc.). I have my detailed 7a variable costs, so looking to compare.

Thanks,
Paul

 

[Kyle Boatright]

It holds 2 more quarts of oil and burns 50% more fuel. Maintenance on similarly equipped aircraft should be about the same except there are two more cylinders which need plugs and compression tests...

 

[larrynew]

It holds 2 more quarts of oil and burns 50% more fuel. Maintenance on similarly equipped aircraft should be about the same except there are two more cylinders which need plugs and compression tests...

Kyle sums it up well. Extra fuel cost is what I’ve noticed most.

 

[Bill Boyd]

Extra fuel burn is a thing - the 6A would cruise at 7.8gph LOP; the -10 seems to settle in at about 11.3.

The bigger difference is part of the fixed cost: insurance. Paying about 3k/yr for 300k hull (and arguably under-insured at today's prices) in-flight the past two years. The -6A was substantially less to insure at about 1/6 the hull value.

 

[togaflyer]

It cost more but its really based on your mission. Our -10 is usual packed with grand kids, or lots of stuff. Just got backdropping the Grandkids off, along with all the stuff Grandma bought for them. We also haul lots of stuff, gear, bikes, etc., etc in our -10. I joke with my wife that we own an RV10-C, C for cargo. The 10 is like a Saratoga or a 182. If you can load it, it will carry it. But lots cheaper to operate then both of those, and a lot faster the a 182. Its a fantastic plane if you think either a true 4 seat or a great hauler is your mission then a -10 is for you.

 

[Richard Connell]

I’ve gone from a 7 to a 10 and concur that roughly 50% increase in fuel and oil use is about right for most of the flying I do. WOT up high LOP or ROP depending on how much of a hurry I’m in.
One thing I’d mention though is that the 10 is noticeably more efficient.
Which manifests itself as a significantly higher TAS than the 7 for my typical mission. Or you can go slower and be very frugal. So the 50% uplift needs qualification.
It’s quite an eye opener and has come as a pleasant surprise.

 

[- Poindexter -]

Great feedback

Thanks for the fantastic feedback, just what I was looking for! And, forgot about the hull value increase.

I've had an 7a for (2+) years and love the plane. But, I fly it for our company's work and found that I need more room for hauling stuff. So, for the next 6-7 years, I would be using the 10 as a cargo hauler with the rest of the seats out. Of course, the occasional passenger seat goes in for wife that wants more room and ease of getting in for fun trips. I like low-wing planes and tri-gear for cheaper insurance.

The next phase for the 10 would be RTW (round-the-world). I would install ER tanks in the wings plus change out or upgrade (if bought) other items, like I've done on my 7a. Buying a project or existing 10 will most likely be the way to go due to limited build time.

 

[Kyle Boatright]

The next phase for the 10 would be ROW (round-the-world). I would install ER tanks in the wings plus change out or upgrade (if bought) other items

You could build/install a substantial aux tank in the back seat or the back seat plus footwells.. The stock Van's fuel valve has an extra (plugged) position that you could use to feed the fuel. An additional 50 or so gallons could go back there pretty easily without creating a CG problem.