I think thats why they made it so fastIts goofy looking
It looks extremely fast and efficient, which likely means it's also extremely unforgiving, similar to the Lancair IV.
Provided that those are acceptable to you and the plane meets your mission, I see no reason not to buy a plane like that.
That's been long gone. Guy in VA has it now. Ive heard it was rough around the edges but he got a nice deal on it.
I wonder how it would handle ice.
Kinda what I was thinking too. Looks like a cool plane.Lose 30 KIAS with a tiny layer of frost would be my guess.
Are mains really close together, or is that just the angle of the photo, maybe a squirrel on the ground? (hence, runway departure)
240kts - dang!
Stalls are a non event. Leading edge cuffs and stall strips make it very forgiving. It will drop the nose but you maintain full control with the full span flaperons. To my knowledge nobody has spun the Venture and I am not going to volunteer. Power on stalls are all but impossible. Any manifold pressure reading at all will cause it to just mush and nothing more.That does not look like a good airplane for stall training or recreational spins.
The guy in picture three looks desperate.
Way more forgiving than a Lancair IV. Flies just like a more responsive Malibu which was the design goal since it was designed by ex piper engineers. I transitioned from a Grumman AA1 to my Venture with only 180 hours tt.It looks extremely fast and efficient, which likely means it's also extremely unforgiving, similar to the Lancair IV.
Provided that those are acceptable to you and the plane meets your mission, I see no reason not to buy a plane like that.
Yes and no... Being an early experimental almost everything was fabricated so that's what you do if you need a part. The only exception are the cast landing gear parts. My main trunion had a crack, I had to reverse engineer it and cnc machine a new one out of solid billet aluminum instead of the original casting. There are two guys who own the company rights now and have been collecting parts to support the fleet. They have a spare of almost everything but it's not cheap. My front axle was galled from a poorly aligned bearing. I bought an axle shaft off aircraft spruce, cut it to length and welded a nut on one end. That's the beauty of experimental aviation.Any problems in getting parts for yours? Seems like the landing gear in particular would be maintenance intensive.
Not at all. The gear has 8" of travel in the oleos so it absorbs a less than perfect touchdown well. The narrow gear allows it to lean into a crosswind that would cause most other airplanes to want to skid and fishtail. You fly the airplane on the ground just like you do in the air. Even at a fast taxi I can bank the airplane a little into a cross wind.Noticed that too. Must be squirrly to land, especially in a crosswind.
@Grum.Man what is the LX model, the M20 and Q20?, the 200, model 21? (ref FAA database)
2 people, can it handle 100lbs of bags?
Do you guys have an online club?
Know of any in west Tx or NM?
where are they more likely to be found, for sale?
Forgot to answer your question on the capacity. While most ventures could carry the weight, only a few could handle the CG with 100 lbs of baggage. Ones with glass panels, fixed gears, or 3 blade propellers may be able to. Believe it or not, mine is tail heavy and just heavy in general compared to others. Mine is around 1450 lbs empty and my gross weight is set at 2200. Most come in around 1300 lbs.@Grum.Man what is the LX model, the M20 and Q20?, the 200, model 21? (ref FAA database)
2 people, can it handle 100lbs of bags?
Do you guys have an online club?
Know of any in west Tx or NM?
where are they more likely to be found, for sale?
No. In fact it would probably be easier to go from retract to fixed than the other way around.I found an unfinished fixed gear project. Can they easily be converted to RG?
A fixed gear that is well faired isn't much slower than a retract. They are a little less attractive In my opinion but that is only once the gear is sucked up. Tony Crawford races his fixed gear in cross country races and usually sees 220knts so only about 20kts slower than the retract. The problem with the fixed gear is you need speed brakes. About the slowest a retract will fly is 140kts and that just about sets off my idle gear warning alarm. Once the gear is out I have to add a lot of power to maintain 120 kts as it has a ton of drag. The fixed gear doesn't have a draggy gear to slow you down. Point it down hill for an approach and the speed is impossible to keep down with out speed brakes.I found an unfinished fixed gear project. Can they easily be converted to RG?
I hope it's not for a mechanical reliability reason.Not many of them fly on a regular basis.
The engine can hold it just fine. The governor is tuned for 2500 rpm max where as an N model 550 is 2700. The kit designer requested this change to increase the durability of the engine and to reduce fuel burn. A lot of venture owners have turned the prop back up to 2700 though it's not really needed. The difference between the IO-550G and 550N was only the governor setting.Looks like a heck of a plane, odd to see a 550 that doesn't hold 300hp, the avionics, well I'd probably be tearing all that heavy crap out and putting a sky view in, interior and paint is of questionable taste, and the canopy is WAAAY too dark, plus if I read that correct it's a Canadian reg plane, so there's a little pain the the butt factor.
That said, that is one heck of a airplane and for sure something way better than a mooney or Bo for a fun XC machine!
There may have been 70 completed but there certainly aren't that many left. Last estimate was about 25 airworthy Ventures and an unkown amount of under construction ones. Of the 25 there are about 10-15 that get flown on a regular basis. The kit is extremely difficult and time consuming to build. Took 10 years and over 3,000 hours to build mine.I hope it's not for a mechanical reliability reason.
I read there are about 70 completed?
The engine can hold it just fine. The governor is tuned for 2500 rpm max where as an N model 550 is 2700. The kit designer requested this change to increase the durability of the engine and to reduce fuel burn. A lot of venture owners have turned the prop back up to 2700 though it's not really needed. The difference between the IO-550G and 550N was only the governor setting.
Trust me, you don't need it lol. If you are in a situation with a Venture where another 20 hp saves your beacon you should be re-evaluating your flying ability. A go around in a Venture is already violent enough. You transition from a 2k ft/min decent to a 4k ft/min climb in seconds.Seems silly, I mean if you want to roll with 280hp I'd rather select it and still have the full 300hp if it's even needed, especially if you have a last minute go around for a deer or something, or ice, seems like you'd want full command of every pony that engine has to give.
Heck on my 185 I often take off with about a finger width of prop pulled out, ofcourse if the situation warrants it I got 300hp at my disposal.
Trust me, you don't need it lol. If you are in a situation with a Venture where another 20 hp saves your beacon you should be re-evaluating your flying ability. A go around in a Venture is already violent enough. You transition from a 2k ft/min decent to a 4k ft/min climb in seconds.