RV-9A vs CH-650

eMKay

eMKay

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Feb 2, 2011
Messages
403
Location
Buffalo, NY
Display Name
Display name:
eMKay
I'm contemplating building my own, and I know these two models are pretty different, but when you look at the numbers, they aren't (unless the CH-650 is using the "sport pilot" prop, which mine won't). One is classified as a light sport and one is not. But they both can be powered by the same engine, and have similar useful load. The RV-9 can be powered by a larger engine if I want but I was thinking of using an O-235, maybe a sparrowhawk 125hp. With this engine they both have similar performance numbers.

Why not an RV12? I love it, but you gotta use the Rotax, nothing wrong with it, just that I'm going to use this for a lot of cross country at gross, want a little extra speed.

Now, since I want a small cross country plane, flying in IMC, does the heavier RV-9 make a little more sense? A 750lb plane seems pretty light, it's 9.85psf wing loading vs. 13. is that a large difference? Also the build quality will be higher (solid rivets vs blind pop rivets) and resale probably higher as well. I'm really just in the gathering info mode right now. Are there any other planes similar to the RV-9? I know of a whole bunch similar to the CH-650 and RV-12, they're all light sports and I'm not a light sport pilot. Just seems that all the planes that appeal to me fall into that category.

RV-9A $22,030
CH-650 $18,500 +$1000 in options standard on the RV-9

Since I'm planning the same engine and avionics the finished planes would be pretty close in cost, that makes me lean toward the RV-9, but the CH-650 is IMHO better looking, has better visibility, and is easier to build.
 
Unless they are cored rivets (like a Cherry Max) I am not a fan of blind rivets on a stressed skin construction, If they are good cored rivets I'm fine, but you add weight over driven rivets. It's a small number though.

As for no Rotax, meh... they make a 120hp unit IIRC and even a turbo 914 that'snot a half bad mill. There's even an EFI system for it. 5 hp isn't gonna make a hill of beans difference in speed.
 
Henning said:
Unless they are cored rivets (like a Cherry Max) I am not a fan of blind rivets on a stressed skin construction, If they are good cored rivets I'm fine, but you add weight over driven rivets. It's a small number though.

As for no Rotax, meh... they make a 120hp unit IIRC and even a turbo 914 that'snot a half bad mill. There's even an EFI system for it. 5 hp isn't gonna make a hill of beans difference in speed.
Click to expand...


Yeah, but how much does that rotating metal mass cost? More than the airframe? I'm not sure what kind of rivets it uses. I do know they use more of them
 
Last edited:
I got to poke around a few at a Vans fly-in event today, I really like the RV-9A, a few pics...

Owner offered me a ride, I'm gonna take him up on the offer, this plane is so beautifully built.
IMG_0815.jpg


IMG_0802.jpg


IMG_0799.jpg


IMG_0801.jpg


IMG_0834.jpg


So I like that RV-9A with sliding canopy, and these avionics and manual flap lever (this is an RV-6)

IMG_0846.jpg


Some other eye candy...

IMG_0839.jpg


IMG_0841.jpg


IMG_0829.jpg


IMG_0831.jpg


Yes, he (she? dunno which was flying, there were 2 in there, female in front seat) landed on the grass next to the runway.

IMG_0832.jpg


Wife watching the Stearman

IMG_0821.jpg


IMG_0818.jpg
 
Something else to consider is resale, the RV9 will have a much better one than the CH650.
 
eMKay said:
Are there any other planes similar to the RV-9? I know of a whole bunch similar to the CH-650 and RV-12, they're all light sports and I'm not a light sport pilot. Just seems that all the planes that appeal to me fall into that category.

RV-9A $22,030
CH-650 $18,500 +$1000 in options standard on the RV-9

Since I'm planning the same engine and avionics the finished planes would be pretty close in cost, that makes me lean toward the RV-9, but the CH-650 is IMHO better looking, has better visibility, and is easier to build.
Click to expand...

The non-LSA version of the Arion Lightning is similar enough in specs to the RV-9 when similarly powered that it might be worth a look: http://www.flylightning.net/lightning-esp.html

You will pay more for the Lightning kit (comparable in price to the RV-9 quick-build kit,) but it appears that builders are completing them in time frames that don't stretch into years (sometimes in just months or even weeks, if done at their site.)

Since the engine, avionics, and miscellaneous items are going to be about 2/3rds of the cost, saving a couple thousand on a $60k to $70k project is probably not a strong decision factor.
 
eMKay said:
I got to poke around a few at a Vans fly-in event today, I really like the RV-9A, a few pics...

Owner offered me a ride, I'm gonna take him up on the offer, this plane is so beautifully built.
Click to expand...

Guaranteed to be the most expensive airplane ride you ever take. ;)
 
Jim Logajan said:
The non-LSA version of the Arion Lightning is similar enough in specs to the RV-9 when similarly powered that it might be worth a look: http://www.flylightning.net/lightning-esp.html

You will pay more for the Lightning kit (comparable in price to the RV-9 quick-build kit,) but it appears that builders are completing them in time frames that don't stretch into years (sometimes in just months or even weeks, if done at their site.)

Since the engine, avionics, and miscellaneous items are going to be about 2/3rds of the cost, saving a couple thousand on a $60k to $70k project is probably not a strong decision factor.
Click to expand...

That is a gorgeous plane, I can't afford to built it that fast, so slow build is for me.
 
I look good in it don't I?

IMG_1391.jpg


IMG_1390.jpg


<insert airplane noises here>
IMG_1393.jpg
 
IMHO The RV has a lot more quality than the Zenith. For the difference in cost you are talking about, I'd go with the RV in a heart beat.
 
Graueradler said:
IMHO The RV has a lot more quality than the Zenith. For the difference in cost you are talking about, I'd go with the RV in a heart beat.
Click to expand...

You are right, and the cost is not really different, the RV-9 is a larger plane, if you compare the RV-12 basic airframe cost to the CH-650 the RV-12 is actually cheaper. Seeing the Vans in person really sold me, they are all beautifully built. They have much better build quality than the production planes I fly now.
 
Take this with a grain of salt, as I may be a bit biased being an RV builder/flyer.....

Build the RV.


But if you do, put an 0320 in it. Since you say you will be doing much xc with the airplane, you may want to have a few more horsepower on high density altitude airports you may visit. The factory demonstrator for Vans has an 0320 160hp engine if I am not mistaken, and the staff that flies the airplanes Vans displays at Sun N Fun and OSH always fight over who gets to fly the 9/9A as it is such a nice xc cruiser.

One thing that is really great about building an RV is all the support and camaraderie that is available on the internet, Rivetbangers.com, vansairforce.net and the RV List to name them specifically. Wealth of information and advice (once you thin out the over the top stuff) that is invaluable during and after the build.



Once again.....


Build the RV.
 
painless said:
Take this with a grain of salt, as I may be a bit biased being an RV builder/flyer.....

Build the RV.


But if you do, put an 0320 in it. Since you say you will be doing much xc with the airplane, you may want to have a few more horsepower on high density altitude airports you may visit. The factory demonstrator for Vans has an 0320 160hp engine if I am not mistaken, and the staff that flies the airplanes Vans displays at Sun N Fun and OSH always fight over who gets to fly the 9/9A as it is such a nice xc cruiser.

One thing that is really great about building an RV is all the support and camaraderie that is available on the internet, Rivetbangers.com, vansairforce.net and the RV List to name them specifically. Wealth of information and advice (once you thin out the over the top stuff) that is invaluable during and after the build.



Once again.....


Build the RV.
Click to expand...

Thanks, think I will. Funny you mention that, I was just comparing o-235's to o-320's on barnstormers, no big difference in prices, no big difference in fuel economy, and no big difference in weight?!? 30lbs? I thought the 320 was much heavier. I just lost 30lbs over the last 3 months and don't plan on gaining it back. Many many more 320's available (of course, they were in the 2 most popular airplanes of all time)
 
I've ordered RV-9A preview plans, the toolbox kit, and the practice airframe part kit. Oh, and ordered $900 worth of tools from my Snap On dealer. Guess I'm committed now. Or should I BE committed?
 
eMKay said:
I've ordered RV-9A preview plans, the toolbox kit, and the practice airframe part kit. Oh, and ordered $900 worth of tools from my Snap On dealer. Guess I'm committed now. Or should I BE committed?
Click to expand...

You are now officially addicted........

First thing is to visit the FAA site and reserve the N number of your new toy.....

Congrats on taking the plunge........ And don't wussie out..:nonod::nonod::nonod:;)

Ben
www.haaspowerair.com
 
I'd take the RV too. On the engine issue, a nearby school has got a decent size fleet of LSAs with Rotax engines, and they've gotten good results. Given the cost of fuel, the efficiency is more of a factor than it used to be. If I can get the same cruise more or less and save a couple of GPH, even if the engine costs a little more to start, I'll probably go for the more efficient engine.
 
You're only restricted to the 912 on an RV-12 if you build it E-LSA. Build it E-AB and you can hang whatever you want on it.
 
I saw an RV 9 built by Jay Kurtz at South Lakeland (FL) Sport Aviation, the other day and it blew my eyes out. It had the most beautiful panel I have ever seen in a small plane.

Jay is some kind of genius and he builds these gorgeous RV's.

Good Luck with the new plane. We all envy you.
 
eMKay said:
I've ordered RV-9A preview plans, the toolbox kit, and the practice airframe part kit. Oh, and ordered $900 worth of tools from my Snap On dealer. Guess I'm committed now. Or should I BE committed?
Click to expand...


Depends on a few things. Most important, "How much money you got?" Not only is it expensive to build planes, you still need another plane to fly for the next 10 years while you build this one.

Oh yeah, you forgot to get good ear plugs. 3M makes the best disposable foam plugs, and that's what I recommend. Reusable plugs in an industrial environment lead to ear infections IME. Just go buy a big bag or at least box of them, they're relatively cheap and you'll be handing them out to everyone in the neighborhood as you rivet....:D
 
Henning said:
Depends on a few things. Most important, "How much money you got?" Not only is it expensive to build planes, you still need another plane to fly for the next 10 years while you build this one.
Click to expand...

The answer is, not much. Which is why it will take awhile. As for what to fly in the next 10 years, the club I joined has 4 planes, and is reasonably priced, so I'm all set there.
 
eMKay said:
The answer is, not much. Which is why it will take awhile. As for what to fly in the next 10 years, the club I joined has 4 planes, and is reasonably priced, so I'm all set there.
Click to expand...


The club deal is good,however every hour rented is money and time away from the build... How much wad do you have to start this project off?(Hopefully at least $15k unless you already have a well appointed shop) How many/what tools do you have? What if any fabrication skill sets do you have?

Most people who build planes successfully, build them to build planes. Most projects built by people looking for a plane to fly, never get completed (at least not without hiring a pro to finish it).

You need to accurately assess your reasons for committing to this project, because I'll tell you right now, you can buy a well built copy of any of the RVs out there already flying for less than you can build one for, and that's not counting the value of your time. If you are building a plane because it is the only way you can afford a plane, don't do it. The odds are stacked HEAVILY against you ever completing it and you will only recover dimes on your investment.
 
Last edited:
Henning said:
The club deal is good,however every hour rented is money and time away from the build... How much wad do you have to start this project off?(Hopefully at least $15k unless you already have a well appointed shop) How many/what tools do you have? What if any fabrication skill sets do you have?

Most people who build planes successfully, build them to build planes. Most projects built by people looking for a plane to fly, never get completed (at least not without hiring a pro to finish it).

You need to accurately assess your reasons for committing to this project, because I'll tell you right now, you can buy a well built copy of any of the RVs out there already flying for less than you can build one for, and that's not counting the value of your time. If you are building a plane because it is the only way you can afford a plane, don't do it. The odds are stacked HEAVILY against you ever completing it and you will only recover dimes on your investment.
Click to expand...

I did not start this thread to be lectured on what it takes to build a plane, I started it to compare two homebuilt planes. Thanks for your input but it is not necessary.
 
eMKay said:
I did not start this thread to be lectured on what it takes to build a plane, I started it to compare two homebuilt planes. Thanks for your input but it is not necessary.
Click to expand...


Ok, then I'd say the RV-9 is a better design aircraft to build as drawn.
 
I'd go with an RV over the CH-650 with a quickness.

Just curious, what do you like about the RV-9 over the 7?
 
BellyUpFish said:
I'd go with an RV over the CH-650 with a quickness.

Just curious, what do you like about the RV-9 over the 7?
Click to expand...

I like the 7 as well. However, I'm not really into aerobatics. I just like to fly. The 9 is almost as fast as the 7. As far as the kit cost, the 7 is actually a little cheaper than the 9. Not by much though. The fuselage is basically the same. The wing is different from what I've read. Also, you can use a 160hp motor on the 9 instead of the 200hp motor on the 7 to get max performance. That's a big difference in motor cost and in fuel burn. From my research, they are both awesome airplanes. I'd guess that most people the buy and build a 7, never use it to its potential and would have been just fine building and flying the 9. For a good, capable cross country machine, the 9 is probably the way to go. I'd definitely build a 9 over the CH-650. I've been looking into this for a couple of years now.
 
One of the most significant differences is that the stall speed of the RV-9 is about 7 mph slower than the RV-7.
 
I'm building an RV-7.

Some of the folks on VAF say they prefer the 7 to the 9 for cross countries because of the higher wing loading. The factory people say the 9 is their favorite two-seat cruiser and I imagine they have more opportunities to fly both. The 9 has a slower stall speed and better glide ratio. The RV7 stalls at 58mph vs 50mph for the RV9 - a Cessna 172 stalls around 54mph for comparison. The CH-650 claims 44mph stall with flaps.

It takes a lot longer to do a flush solid rivet than a standard pulled rivet.

For a flush rivet on the RV you have to:
Assemble pieces
Drill holes to final size
Disassemble pieces
Deburr holes
Dimple holes
Reassemble pieces
Rivet with gun and bucking bar (you want/need 2 people for some of the airframe)

You'll lose some of that time advantage with the CH-650 kit because all of the pieces are not pre-punched. For example, the wing skins are pre-punched but you'll have to line up and drill the ribs, etc, manually. Not a huge deal but every additional step adds time. I would find someone who's built a CH-650 kit and ask them what the big stumbles were. The RV-9 is the more capable airplane, but with a bigger airframe, engine, flush rivets, etc it should be. The RV will almost certainly have better resale. There are still some people out there building RVs and selling them for profit if you can imagine. You can buy a nice RV6 for a bargain right now, though, especially if it has an O-320.
 
Andrew Sego said:
I'm building an RV-7.

Some of the folks on VAF say they prefer the 7 to the 9 for cross countries because of the higher wing loading. The factory people say the 9 is their favorite two-seat cruiser and I imagine they have more opportunities to fly both. The 9 has a slower stall speed and better glide ratio. The RV7 stalls at 58mph vs 50mph for the RV9 - a Cessna 172 stalls around 54mph for comparison. The CH-650 claims 44mph stall with flaps.
Click to expand...

In reality, the difference between wing loadings in the 7 & 9 for cross country flight with turbulence is not noticeable. Put on a blind fold, and you can't tell. If the turbulence is bad, you get kicked around either way.

I actually built, and fly a 6, but it's much the same as a 7. I do get a bit of dutch roll, with my shorter tail. The 9 does have the advantage of a slower landing speed. A friend of mine has built two 9's, He uses mph, and I use knots. We use the same numbers for the approach and landings, which are the same as a Piper Archer using kts. Make it easy to switch planes, although the 9 is landing slower.

My plane, with it's Lyc 360 will out climb, and out run the 9 with an 0320. We both have C/S props. Mine is more sensitive on the controls. I prefer that, but some others prefer the 9 "feel". As to fuel burn, they can be very even when the 0360 is throttled back.

The 9 owner has flown his 9 at 17,500' several times. He say's the plane is comfortable at that altitude. I have not flown my 6 that high........as 14,500 msl is the highest I've flown it. Therefor, I don't know if his 9's wing will beat me in efficiency at the altitude, or not. Some claim it can.
We both have oxygen systems.

edit: P.S. -- as previously explained by others, the 9 does have a better glide ratio. It also has a lower power off descent rate. However, with a heavier C/S prop acting as a speed brake, even the 9 will fall through a flare and land hard, if you don't watch the airspeed. I either do steep power off landings (flare at the perfect moment), or use a bit of power. with the 6.

L.Adamson
 
Last edited:
L.Adamson said:
The 9 owner has flown his 9 at 17,500' several times. He say's the plane is comfortable at that altitude. I have not flown my 6 that high........as 14,500 msl is the highest I've flown it. Therefor, I don't know if his 9's wing will beat me in efficiency at the altitude, or not. Some claim it can.
We both have oxygen systems.

L.Adamson
Click to expand...

I have had the -7A (with IO-360) at 17,500' with no problems at all. It trued out nicely and didn't feel 'mushy' at all at that altitude.
 
Andrew Sego said:
I'm building an RV-7.

Some of the folks on VAF say they prefer the 7 to the 9 for cross countries because of the higher wing loading. The factory people say the 9 is their favorite two-seat cruiser and I imagine they have more opportunities to fly both. The 9 has a slower stall speed and better glide ratio. The RV7 stalls at 58mph vs 50mph for the RV9 - a Cessna 172 stalls around 54mph for comparison. The CH-650 claims 44mph stall with flaps.

It takes a lot longer to do a flush solid rivet than a standard pulled rivet.

For a flush rivet on the RV you have to:
Assemble pieces
Drill holes to final size
Disassemble pieces
Deburr holes
Dimple holes
Reassemble pieces
Rivet with gun and bucking bar (you want/need 2 people for some of the airframe)

You'll lose some of that time advantage with the CH-650 kit because all of the pieces are not pre-punched. For example, the wing skins are pre-punched but you'll have to line up and drill the ribs, etc, manually. Not a huge deal but every additional step adds time. I would find someone who's built a CH-650 kit and ask them what the big stumbles were. The RV-9 is the more capable airplane, but with a bigger airframe, engine, flush rivets, etc it should be. The RV will almost certainly have better resale. There are still some people out there building RVs and selling them for profit if you can imagine. You can buy a nice RV6 for a bargain right now, though, especially if it has an O-320.
Click to expand...

Even on the Zenith kits and for that matter the RV-12 using pulled rivets the steps are identical except for the dimpling and bucking process.... Alot of people thing you just line up the parts, drill and then "pop rivet" them together..... Not true or safe.....:nono:.

Short story................ For years all the RV guys would ridicule me at airshows / fly ins etc for building a plane that had pulled rivets. Some of those guys got downright hostile when arguing the fact pulled rivets DON'T belong on a plane...... Fast forward to 2009 at OSH and my plane was parked in the Zenith booth... Right across form the Vans display with their RV-12 proudly displayed up front. I bet I spent many an hour walking over and stirring the pot with the Vans guys and customers and would make the comment out loud . " hey, are those pulled rivets safe? :dunno::dunno:.:lol:

http://www.zenith.aero/photo/ben-haas-stol-ch-801
 
Last edited:
N801BH said:
Even on the Zenith kits and for that matter the RV-12 using pulled rivets the steps are identical except for the dimpling and bucking process.... Alot of people thing you just line of the parts, drill and then "pop rivet" them together..... Not true or safe.....:nono:.

Short story................ For years all the RV guys would ridicule me at airshows / fly ins etc for building a plane that had pulled rivets. Some of those guys got downright hostile when arguing the fact pulled rivets DON'T belong on a plane...... Fast forward to 2009 at OSH and my plane was parked in the Zenith booth... Right across form the Vans display with their RV-12 proudly displayed up front. I bet I spent many an hour walking over and stirring the pot with the Vans guys and customers and would make the comment out loud . " hey, are those pulled rivets safe? :dunno::dunno:.:lol:

http://www.zenith.aero/photo/ben-haas-stol-ch-801
Click to expand...

I would love to see those guys walking with the tails between their legs.
 
Last edited:
Panew said:
I would love to see those guys walking with the tails between their legs.
Click to expand...

We can accept............that slower planes can use pulled rivets.. :wink2:

L.Adamson
 
is the CH 650 the one that uses the wing skin as an aileron hinge,,if it is I wouldn't touch one with a barge pole,,I'm building an RV6 and reckon the Vans aeroplanes are top of the list,,although I could be biased
 
N801BH said:
Short story................ For years all the RV guys would ridicule me at airshows / fly ins etc for building a plane that had pulled rivets. Some of those guys got downright hostile when arguing the fact pulled rivets DON'T belong on a plane......
Click to expand...

I hope they don't look at my RV; it has some pulled rivets in places I couldn't easily squeeze or drive.
 
metalman said:
is the CH 650 the one that uses the wing skin as an aileron hinge,,if it is I wouldn't touch one with a barge pole,,I'm building an RV6 and reckon the Vans aeroplanes are top of the list,,although I could be biased
Click to expand...

What? no. Every build I have seen uses real hinges.

650nket5.jpg


Actually considering a CH-640 now. (4 seat version of Alerus 2000, kinda like a Cherokee)
 
Andrew Sego said:
I'm building an RV-7.

It takes a lot longer to do a flush solid rivet than a standard pulled rivet.

For a flush rivet on the RV you have to:
Assemble pieces
Drill holes to final size
Disassemble pieces
Deburr holes
Dimple holes
Reassemble pieces
Rivet with gun and bucking bar (you want/need 2 people for some of the airframe)
Click to expand...

Aren't you mixing in the differences between flush and button head rivets?
 
painless said:
Take this with a grain of salt, as I may be a bit biased being an RV builder/flyer.....

Build the RV.


But if you do, put an 0320 in it. Since you say you will be doing much xc with the airplane, you may want to have a few more horsepower on high density altitude airports you may visit. The factory demonstrator for Vans has an 0320 160hp engine if I am not mistaken, and the staff that flies the airplanes Vans displays at Sun N Fun and OSH always fight over who gets to fly the 9/9A as it is such a nice xc cruiser.

One thing that is really great about building an RV is all the support and camaraderie that is available on the internet, Rivetbangers.com, vansairforce.net and the RV List to name them specifically. Wealth of information and advice (once you thin out the over the top stuff) that is invaluable during and after the build.



Once again.....


Build the RV.
Click to expand...


I agree. The 0-235 would be a tad under powered at altitude. 0-320 or 0-360 would be a better choice. The 9 is a sweet heart to fly. I put 400 hours on one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top